A Quick Recap: The Original Amp

CADEX is a premium sub-brand of Giant Manufacturing Co. Ltd., the world’s largest bicycle manufacturer. Originally launched in the 1980s and reintroduced in 2019, CADEX focuses on high-performance carbon components, from wheels and cockpits to saddles and even, tyres.

The Amp saddle was first launched in 2023 as a follow-up to the popular Boost race saddle with the aim of creating a saddle that suited a wider range of riders. For a more universal fit, CADEX opted for a short-nosed, wide-winged design, not unlike the market-leading Specialized Power saddle. In fact, at 242mm in length, the Amp is just 3mm longer than the Power saddle, and comes in one width only: 145mm.

What made the Amp stand out for me was that it worked right away. No break-in required. No pressure points and no saddle sore issues. The shape and padding hit the sweet spot: just enough give to absorb vibrations while still feeling supported. The curved wings and generous central cutout help minimise friction and pressure. Importantly, the Amp allows freedom of movement. One can push backward on the slightly curved rear end to rotate into an aggressive or more aerodynamic position — something other short-nosed saddles tend to restrict.

AMP 3D - What’s new

The new Amp 3D retains the carbon base and integrated rails of the original Amp saddle but replaces the Particle Flow foam upper with a 3D-printed lattice structure.

CADEX is far from the first brand to incorporate 3D printing into its saddle line-up. Specialized, Fizik, Prologo and a growing list of others have already embraced the technology. And like CADEX, most of them have partnered with Silicon Valley-based printing specialists Carbon.

The key advantage of a 3D-printed upper is the ability to precisely tune the material’s density in ways that aren’t possible with traditional foam. Softer zones are placed beneath sensitive areas, while firmer sections support the sit bones for stable power transfer.

The distinct open lattice design not only improves airflow compared to closed-cell foam, it also enhances weight distribution and helps reduce undercarriage pressure on long rides. 3d uppers are also praised for their durability. Unlike foam, they don’t degrade over time.

While most 3D-printed saddles use a honeycomb or hexagonal for the saddle’s internal structure, CADEX stands out by using a gyroid structure. A gyroid is a complex three-dimensional shape with no flat surfaces or straight lines. It curves and twists continuously, forming an efficient, isotropic structure. In practical terms, this means the saddle can deform and distribute pressure not just vertically (like foam or honeycomb) but also laterally and diagonally. The AMP 3D sports this gyroid structure beneath key contact zones, while a denser hexagonal lattice reinforces the outer edges for added stability.

In real-world use, this means the saddle feels softer when riding upright, placing more weight on the centre. Roll forward into an aggressive position and the support firms up under your sit bones. This kind of precision zoning is where 3D-printed saddles really shine. While high-end foam saddles also offer zoned densities, the tuning is more limited. With 3D printing, manufacturers can adjust density at a micro level.

Weighing in at 147g, the Amp 3D is slightly heavier than its predecessor but it’s among the lightest 3D-printed saddles on the market.

The Cadex Amp 3D - Specs

• Weight: 147g
• Rail Size: 9.5mm
• Width: 145mm
• Length: 245mm
• Stack Height: 41mm
• Rail Material: Carbon
• Rail Shape: Oval
• Shell: Advanced Forged Composite Technology (AFCT)
• Padding: G3D Gyroid & Lattice Structure
• Price: $450 /  £369.99 / €400

Ride Impressions

The original Amp is a well-balanced performance saddle. This new Amp 3D keeps everything that worked in the original and adds more refinement. The shape is familiar, yes, but the ride feel is new.

There’s a noticeable increase in the saddle’s firmness to the point that it feels slightly taller than the original, and it even offers some damping effect. By that I mean that the road buzz is filtered out more effectively than with traditional foam.

The sit bones feel cradled at every angle. Not in a sink-in, memory-foam way but in a firmly supported manner.

For me, the only downside is the surface texture. Like most 3D-printed saddles, the highly textured material has some grippiness to it that, when paired with lycra, has an almost-velco effect. It gives it a very planted feel, which is great for riders who like to stay locked into position but less ideal for those, like me, who prefer to slide and shift throughout the ride. It’s not a dealbreaker, but it is a design feature worth considering depending on your riding style.

It also marks a slight departure from CADEX’s original aim of creating a saddle for a broader range of riders. On one hand, the 3D-printed upper offers a uniquely tailored, personalised ride feel that should accommodate many. On the other hand, it discourages movement, which somewhat limits its use for me.

Is it better than the original? Technically, yes. The Amp 3D is a fine example of how far saddle technology has come. It’s smartly engineered, impressively light and offers a dynamically supported ride feel. But despite the precision and polish, I still prefer the original Amp. On longer rides, I want the freedom to move around.

And, as with the original Amp, the integrated carbon rails help keep the weight down and eliminate pressure points, both big positives, but I do wish there were a titanium-railed version, if only to avoid the seatpost clamp compatibility issues that come with the oval rail shape.

Verdict

The CADEX Amp is a personal favourite. It’s my #1 go-to saddle for both road and gravel. The new Amp 3D brings a clear technical upgrade: it’s smartly engineered, impressively light, and offers firm, dynamic support with a more refined ride feel. But for me, the grippy surface and more planted sensation made it feel a little too locked-in on longer rides. That said, if you prefer a secure, stay-put position in the saddle, the 3D upper could well be worth the upgrade.

At $450 / €400, the Amp 3D is a premium investment, but one that’s priced in line with other high-end 3D-printed saddles.

Most of the time, when brands invite media to test their bikes, it’s to show off their halo products. Their lightest, fastest, most high-tech race machines. The superbikes that are wind tunnel-tested, dressed in top-shelf components and painted to turn heads in a showroom. Getting to ride these engineering marvels is a big perk of the job but sometimes, we lose touch of the bikes people are actually buying – not the $12,000 carbon superbikes but the $2000 metal ones.

The truth is, most bikes above a certain price point are excellent. Light, fast, sharp-handling. It's hard to go wrong when the investment’s there. But what about the bikes that don’t come with massive R&D budgets and glossy marketing campaigns? The ones built with tighter margins and a more restrained spec sheet? Arguably, making a good bike at this level is the tougher challenge.

These bikes might not be as aspirational, but there’s a lot riding on them. For many, especially those just getting into the sport, this is where the journey starts. And if we want people to fall in love with cycling the way we have, these bikes can’t just be affordable, they need to be capable, comfortable and, most importantly, fun to ride.

For many U.S. consumers, Van Rysel’s aluminium bikes will also be their first real introduction to the brand. Barely six years old, Van Rysel is a French performance-focused cycling brand and subsidiary of Decathlon, the one-stop sports superstore. Van Rysel made a splash in 2024 with its sponsorship of the Decathlon-Ag2r La Mondiale WorldTour team and the Van Rysel RCR Pro team bike, which was one of the most talked-about bikes in 2024. But despite its global presence–2,000 storefronts and counting–Decathlon has no retail stores in the United States. And Van Rysel is only now beginning to break into the American market with a limited offering on their direct-to-consumer website and a handful of strategic retail partnerships, most notably with REI, which has exclusive rights to sell the GRVL AF models through summer 2025.

This is all to say: the GRVL AF 2 is an important bike for Van Rysel. Important enough that they flew a group of media out to Vermont to put the bike through its paces. And that’s how I found myself reviewing the most affordable bike I’ve ridden in quite some time.

Let’s dive in and see how it fared.

Meet the Van Rysel GRVL AF 2

Van Rysel says its new line of gravel bikes was designed with comfort, versatility and adventure in mind. Promising a confidence-inspiring do-it-all platform whether you’re tackling chunky gravel, cruising country backroads, loading up for a bikepacking trip or just commuting across town.

At the heart of the GRVL AF series is a 6061 aluminum frame—AF stands for “Aluminium Frame,” not the other thing—and a carbon fork, both equipped with plenty of mounting points for bags, racks or fenders/mudguards. There are three builds, each making use of the same aluminium frame, carbon fork, alloy wheels and finishing kit.

The entry-level model tested here features a 1x10 MicroSHIFT SWORD drivetrain paired with TRP Spyre mechanical disc brakes and retails for $1399 / £999.99. An extra $600/ £300 gets you a 1x13 SRAM Apex mechanical drivetrain with hydraulic brakes. At the top of the range, the $2,399 / build is spec’d with a Shimano GRX 610 groupset and GRX 400 hydraulic brakes.

Drivetrains aside, the only other difference between the builds are the tyres. My test bike came with 40mm Hutchinson Touareg tyres. The Apex build uses the same tyres but in a 45mm width, and the top-end model is spec’d with 40mm Continental Terra Trail tyres. While spec’d for moderate terrain, the frame and fork will accommodate tyres up to 50mm.

My XS test bike came in a bold "granite pink" paintjob, which I quite liked, and there’s a sandstone colourway, too. The understated branding keeps the look clean and modern.

Specs

• 6061 double butted aluminium frame
• Carbon fork with aluminium Steerer
• Aluminium handlebars, stem, seatpost
• Decathlon Comfort 30º saddle
• Shifters: MicroSHIFT SWORD 1x10 SB-G7000
• Derailleur: MicroSHIFT SWORD 1x10 7005M Rear Derailleur
• Cassette: MicroSHIFT H104 Advent X 11-48T
• Crankset: Miranda Chainflow 3D Alloy 40T
• Brakes: TRP Spyre mechanical disc with 160mm rotors
• Wheels: Aluminium Van Rysel branded, Tubeless Ready
• Tyres: Hutchinson Touareg 700x40
• Tyre clearance: 50mm
• Claimed weight: 23.9 lbs or 10.83kg for a size medium
• Weight limit: supports a combined rider and gear weight of up to 242 lbs (110 kg)
• Price: $1399 / £999.99

The Frame

I rode an XS frame and felt right at home on the bike from the start, with the reach being just 3mm shy from than on my own gravel bike. If this were my bike, I’d likely remove a spacer or two for a sportier fit, but even out of the box, the geometry lands squarely in that endurance sweet spot — not too upright, not too aggressive.

With a 70-degree head tube angle and a 1020mm wheelbase, the bike’s handling leans toward the stable side, prioritising predictability and confidence over rough terrain and descents. That said, it didn’t feel sluggish on mellow trails either. The handling was still responsive enough to enjoy some light off-road fun.

The frame features a gently sloping top tube, which improves standover clearance and may also offer a touch of added compliance thanks to the exposed seatpost.

Up front, the carbon fork is paired with an alloy steerer tube, which keeps the cost low while adding durability and peace of mind when tightening stem bolts. The fork also includes three accessory mounts per leg, and like the frame, internal cable routing leads to a flat disc brake mount.

The Drivetrain

The entry-level build comes with a 1 x 10 MicroSHIFT SWORD drivetrain and TRP Spyre cable-actuated disc brakes.

While it’s been a minute, I fondly remember these brakes well from racing cyclocross when disc brakes were just becoming a thing. This dual-piston mechanical setup gave better stopping power and modulation than many other mechanical discs at the time. And while they don’t match the power or finesse of today’s hydraulic systems, they’re significantly easier to set up and maintain. For the price point, they offer dependable performance.

The SWORD drivetrain was new to me, but it left a strong enough impression that I’ll be writing a separate review on the groupset soon.

Designed specifically for gravel, MicroSHIFT SWORD was designed to balance a wide gear range (an impressive 436%) and reliable shifting with durability and affordability for riders tackling mixed terrain. The bike came spec’d with a 11–48T cassette and a 40t front chainring, which was plenty of range for the undulating terrain of Vermont.

While not as smooth or refined as its pricier competitors, the shifting was consistently reliable and predictable. The dedicated rear derailleur even features a clutch mechanism to keep the chain taut over bumpy terrain, reducing slap and improving chain retention.

But what impressed me most were the shifter ergonomics. The shallow hoods and compact shape were very comfortable. And the lever reach is short and intuitive, with a decidedly mechanical feel that makes shifting feel deliberate and crisp. The up- and downshift paddles are uniquely shaped with a nice texture to them and clean, taught engagement. The whole system has a surprisingly premium feel that belies its entry-level price point. And while the components’ finish is a little plastic-y, it looks clean.

I never felt limited by the 10 speeds, either. While 2 or 3 speeds short from many 1x competitors, the gear steps felt natural. The jumps between cogs were never jarring or awkward, which speaks to smart spacing across the wide 11–48T cassette. The number of gears don’t matter so much if they’re well spaced.

Kudos also to the size-specific crank arm lengths, which are just right at 165mm for the XS and small bikes.

The Wheels & Finishing Kit

The finishing kit isn’t anything to write home about but nothing to complain about, either. The 40mm-wide handlebars felt a bit wide for the smallest bike size offering; I would have preferred 38mm bars. That said, the flare and shallow drop were nice touches you don’t often see on lower spec bikes. I did swap the saddle for one of my own from the start, so I can’t comment on the stock option, but that’s a contact point many riders are quick to change anyway.

The wheels weigh in at a claimed 4.14 lbs (1,877g), with the Touareg tyres adding about 490g each. Factor in tubes, rim tape, and other small bits, and you’re looking at roughly 3kg for the rotating mass. This is an obvious area for potential upgrades, whether through an entry-level carbon wheelset or an premium alloy alternative, and by going tubeless to enhance ride quality and flat protection.

With that said, there’s nothing wrong with the existing wheelset. They felt durable and with centerlock hubs, thru-axles, and a 27mm internal rim width, they check all the boxes for a modern, versatile gravel setup.

How it rides

Over the course of three days on Vermont’s lumpy backroads, the GRVL AF 2 proved itself as a remarkably easy bike to get along with. It’s comfortable and intuitive, capable and yet lively enough to add some spark to the ride.

While it carries a bit more weight and lacks the snap of the carbon race-capable gravel bikes I’m used to, I never felt held back. On the contrary, the GRVL’s well-roundedness shone through across a range of terrain.

The stiff aluminum frame responds well to out-of-the-saddle efforts, efficiently translating power into forward motion up the climbs or during accelerations. Meanwhile, the carbon fork and high-volume tyres help take the edge off, softening some of the road chatter.

The geometry hits a sweet spot where the bike’s handling is responsive and playful enough to feel engaged, yet stable and predictable when the loose surfaces or descents call for it.

However, on fast descents, there is a moment when the bike’s weight asserts itself. It can feel like the bike’s starting to run away from you,building momentum faster than expected, but it’s easily controlled with a little feathering of the brakes or a few extra inches of stopping space at the bottom.

What stood out most was the ride’s composure. I found myself settling in and simply enjoying my surroundings and company. The GRVL AF provides well-rounded performance that newer riders will especially appreciate: confidence across uneven terrain, forgiveness in handling, and comfort for the long days. For that, the bike is aided by the drivetrain and brakes, too.

Versatility is another standout feature. The frame and fork offer plenty of mounting options for bikepacking excursions and commuter needs alike. With clearance for 50mm tyres and an endurance-focused geometry, it’s a bike that’s ready for multiple identities. Load it up, strip it down, hit dirt or tarmac. It’ll play along.

Verdict

For the $1,399 price tag, there’s very little to fault here. The GRVL AF 2 is a remarkably easy bike to get along with. It delivers a well-rounded ride quality, reliable spec, and a geometry that strikes a fine balance between comfort and capability.

I’m partial to hydraulic disc brakes, especially when riding with a heavy load or on technical descents. so I’d be tempted to stretch for the $600 upgrade to get the SRAM Apex-equipped model. That said, the TRP Spyres specced here do a perfectly respectable job, offering consistent braking with the bonus of easier setup and maintenance. One could always upgrade to Paul Klampers or TRP’s Hy/Rd calipers down the road. Plus, that headturning pink colourway is only available on the SWORD build, and aesthetics count.

If you’re interested in trying your hand at gravel racing, this may not be the bike for you. But for exploring backroads, trying bikepacking, logging long endurance miles or commuting through the city, the GRVL AF 2 is a confident, capable performer with room to grow alongside you.

And for those in the U.S., Van Rysel’s partnership with REI is also a significant plus. You’ll likely be able to see the bike in person, take it for a test ride, and make use of REI’s warranty and nationwide support.

At first glance the spec sheet is promising. With the launch of Super Record 13, the Italian brand appears to have gone back to its knitting.

It’s revised the pricing. This new pro-level groupset, whilst not cheap, is now pitched at the same pricing point as both SRAM and Shimano, depending on the spec you go for. The quoted price for a full groupset is now €4,300 / US$4,750 / £3,900, without power.

With a claimed weight of 2445g that would make it the lightest of the big three, and with pricing now competitive at the top tier, the remaining question the new Super Record has to answer, is whether or not it performs, and what is it like to live with. If it can answer those questions emphatically, without the hesitation that came with the last version, Campagnolo could be back in the race. If it can’t, it begs the question, what is Campagnolo for anymore? That for me, would be an operatic tragedy.

Buckle up, this is a long review, but it’s not an exaggeration to say this groupset is of existential importance to Campagnolo’s future, and even if it wasn’t, there’s a ton of components to get through.

Cassette and Chainset

Changes here are minimal, but subjectively, to my eye, this is the best looking chainset on the market.

The revised BB cups are called Quick Tech and I’m told there is no cross compatibility with earlier UT or Protech BB’s. The retainer clip and wavey washer are essentially the other way around, but functionality is largely the same. I suspect Campagnolo has done this to stop any mixing and matching with incorrect chain and rings, now that the chain is narrower. The bearings are still mounted on the axle. While it’s better than chancing the alignment by mounting them in the frame, it’s still a pain for your mechanic.

The hirth link remains. Ignore anyone that tells you this isn’t a stiff way to mount a crank. There’s a tube of titanium in there at a wall thickness you wouldn’t find in a roll cage on a Dakar truck. The axle is not going anywhere and you won’t bend it. In operation the cranks do the job they’re supposed to and the drivetrain runs silently and smoothly.

This is the first time I’ve ridden any Super Record product with a 32t cassette out back. That’s news, because even when Frome was killing it up and downhill in the Giro on a Shimano 32t, you still couldn’t buy a series correct 32t cassette for Super Record.

The Wireless launch in 2023 surprised everyone by lurching the other way, by not offering a full-size chainset, not even a mid-compact. Both cassette and crankset options in this new group are more varied and wider ranging than all the other top-tier groups available in the market. That’s a win for Campagnolo, tempered perhaps by the absence of a 160mm crank.

The rear derailleur

This is a big mech. While it’s smaller and better proportioned than the last one, the current Dura Ace mech still looks more compact. However, the next version of DA will need to mount batteries in the rear mech. If the XTR launch is anything to go by, Shimano won’t have the sleeker and smaller option for long, and the new Super Record mech does look very special, albeit less elegant than EPS.

If you change under load, the mech responds telepathically, moving the chain up or down the block without hesitation in what feels like half a link, or a blink, and at times, a big crack. If you’re used to sneaking around behind your mates on a stealthy Di2 shift with only a squeak from the motor to give you away, this system is not for you.

Speaking of squeaky motors, if you don’t mind an assertive click as the chain finds it’s gear, but hate the rodent-like squeak and groan of the motor in some electric mechs there’s way less of that here. And an immediate shift.

If you change gear the way you should – with mechanical sympathy – the shift can be as quiet as SRAM. I’m not sure it’s ever as quiet shifting as Shimano though, in any circumstances. But, as I’ve alluded to already, I find a Shimano Di2 system too quiet at times, especially in concert with their oft don’t-know-you’ve-pressed-it shifter buttons.

There is no doubt you’ve changed gear in a Super Record system, and that feeling remains. The shift feels like pulling a trigger (pressing the trigger in this case) and the response is just as instantaneous as a gun. There is no discernible moment where the shift button doesn’t feel hardwired to the mech. It’s very quick.

The chain moves through the mech in smooth, spooky silence too. The larger pulleys and ceramic bearings in the top pulley keep it all feeling very luxurious and super efficient. There’s also a fancy black-chrome-esque coating, which may be contributing to the eerily silent running.

The front derailleur

This is simply much better than previous wired versions of EPS with zero chain drag to the next ring, and a significant improvement on the outgoing model. I couldn’t make the chain drag on an up or down shift in any one position on the front or rear cassette. The chain felt under control in every shift. No delay, no snagging, no drag, just a nicely controlled, yet fast, shift, with no fuss.

The other big news on the front mech is that it’s no longer the same size as your Garmin. The battery is fixed on the front, giving more tyre clearance, they say. ‘Leg clearance’ would have been more honest given their last effort. The new design gives plenty of space now, and it’s inline with the other brand’s mechs in terms of profile.

Charging and battery life

One thing I haven’t yet mentioned is charging. Batteries can be charged on or off the bike, with a magnetic charge port on the battery itself. The engagement with the charger is via a lightly fitted magnetic connection.

Dura-Ace has a horrendous charging interface that often doesn’t stay in place. No trouble here yet with Campagnolo’s just about magnetic solution, but surely USB-C is due on the next generations of all these items?

Whilst the claimed charging rates are class leading, and it does indeed charge super fast, the rear mech seems to be thirsty on the juice. A longer term review will allow me to assess battery life more fully. I suspect it just prefers a full charge, rather than a blast of electrons here and there, when it’s near one of the few sockets that’s not already charging something else!

The shifters

I can’t talk about shifting without talking about how it’s actuated, once again thank goodness, via a Campy thumbshifter. It is back, reimagined, and very good indeed, operable from a number of useful angles.

One small gripe is that you can unintentionally shift gears when braking and shifting at the same time, such as when approaching a junction. Your hands are loaded up under braking at this point, slowing the bike, with fingers wrapped on the brake lever. There’s a lot of hand for the set up to accommodate in this moment and you can fudge a shift in the wrong direction. Bear in mind I do have size 12 hands. Once you’re aware it’s there and you’ve made provision for it, the thumb shifter never really feels in the way however.

In terms of the function when pressed, both thumb shifter and paddle have a short throw, giving no sense of latency, and at the same time requiring only a light touch. That’s quite a clever mix, especially given the haptic response of the shift button is clear and communicative, and this helps make shifting feel direct, and deliberate. This was my favourite aspect of the system, and the buttons feel great, too. Hold the button for just a while longer and you can dispatch three gears at a time or as many gears as you need without delay. All the buttons on the ergopower lever are configurable in the app, and there’s also a neat ‘one hand’ mode, so you can control both mechs from one lever if needed.

The paddle shift lever on the back of the brake lever is a wonder of ergonomics on its own. No matter where your hands are positioned on the hoods, the tip of your ring finger can find the inside edge of the relatively large real estate given to the paddle. The inside edge tells you you’re there, in a way that neither SRAM or Shimano can; the former has a larger but smooth-ish paddle, while the Di2 paddles can be fiddly to locate. Like the thumb shift haptics, you also know you’ve pressed the button, not because of an arduous click or long throw though. It all just feels efficient, and you know you’ve done it.

The mode buttons and new ‘Smart Button’ are all easy enough to operate and fall nicely. I didn’t set up the mode button up, as I didn’t have a head unit mount for the bar on my test bike, but it can theoretically control your head unit, answer a call, or shift tracks on your Spotify. Or any number of other functions. This will be handy for some and brings it into line with competitors.

The hoods and brake levers

Campagnolo knows a lot about ergonomics and the new ergopower lever in the SR13 system is its best work yet. The material used for the hoods feels delicate. It’s tactility could be a sign of weakness, but it’s absolutely not if previous versions (which use the same material) are anything to go by. It feels great, looks better than the other main players, and offers loads of grip.

The new brake lever kicks out considerably, clearing the centre line of the bar, leaving what feels like class-leading clearance for your fingers. The previous versions, and Di2 does trap fingers, way before the brake caliper is entirely on at times. With this design and the short throw on the brake lever, this is way less likely. The levers themselves look very classy, feel good, and they’re adjustable for reach.

The tip of the hood is angled in. Campagnolo says that the design is UCI legal but I could care less about that aspect – the position it affords your hands is brilliant. It leaves your wrist completely neutral, in the same position it would be if hung by your side in the breeze. Fitters rejoice. It is very comfortable indeed.

The extra gear

Ok, ok. I know, no one was asking for more gears. However, far beyond it being a marketing stunt to sell a few more groupsets and usher in another new standard, there are use cases where it is obviously really beneficial. And to try and placate the cynics, I’ll take a few moments to explain why.

Cadence is often dependent on finding the right gear. Some people don't worry about cadence and enjoy their riding no less of course, but for those that enjoy road craft, the extra ratio is helpful, especially on a 32.

Fundamentally, the downside of running a 32t cassette is bigger jumps and that problem is better managed here with 13 ratios. In fact, it’s eliminated. For a fast TT style ride over rolling hills, or endurance work on an even smaller cassette where maintaining a consistent power output is essential, there is no downside to having the extra ratio. Especially when the shift feels this fast and addictive.

The App - My Campy 3.0

Once set up, you shouldn’t need the app too much. This is good news, because it’s not great as it is. Having experienced initial set up issues with the front mech, I went into the app to look for adjustment, status, and assess set up. I couldn’t. Clicking on the front mech icon serves up the rear mech menu. This is clearly a bug, but this is not forgivable in what is not a pre-launch version of the app.

Functionally, you can access chainline switches, and shift assist (think Syncro shift) and check your battery levels and assign buttons as you wish.

The brakes

The brakes are still brilliant. There wasn't much needed changing here, but they've found some titanium screws to drop a bit of weight (7g) and made some changes to the brake pad, whilst adding a sintered option for better performance in the winter. I rode in wet and dry on the 'standard' pads, and Campagnolo's brake system is still outstanding. Feel is great at the lever, with all the modulation and power that you need.

Verdict

Some people will never choose Campagnolo. Shimano offers a conservative, reliable choice that’s hard to ignore, that’s why it’s so dominant.

With this new groupset however, we now have not just an exotic option for your bike transmission, but a rational choice – not without fault – but an alternative that is now about subjective differences not compromise.

With this new groupset, pricing and weight is now competitive. Shifting is not as luxuriant and silent as Di2, but Super Record 13 is wickedly fast – it feels faster than anything else I’ve ridden – and shifts with an aggressive and determined movement, that is addictive and offers something undeniably competitive and high performing, but different.

Campagnolo has remembered that buying and owning Campagnolo parts is not just about performance, but about how they make you feel. Now, far from confused, as some aspects of Campagnolo design has left me feeling in the recent past, this new groupset makes you feel like you made an entirely valid choice to use an alternative transmission that’s different, not worse.

Yes, the app needs work. They can probably fix that with a firmware update. Yes, it is likely fiddlier to set up. But, the hardware and electronics in the main components are once again world class, and look at it.

The laurels of victory have been hung about the neck of Campagnolo components so much in World Tour cycling, that they featured them on their 80th anniversary logo. But just as the Italians created the tradition of awarding laurel wreaths to the victor, they also warned of the dangers of resting on them.

With Super Record 13, it’s clearly thinking straight again. If it can trickle this addictive shifting platform down, without losing the refinement or speed, Campagnolo might finally feel like it’s not just relevant again, but a rational and exciting choice for way more people.

Campagnolo has made a brilliant groupset. Now it just needs to fix the app.

I received the full TRP Vistar groupset a month ahead of its release and took it on a cross-country gravel tour, culminating in the 200-mile Unbound Gravel race. I mounted it on my race bike, a Rodeo Adventure Labs Trail Donkey 4.0, with the goal of testing its capabilities as a serious gravel racing setup.

The test period naturally broke into a clean three-part split: a week in the wet, late-spring mud and grit of Oregon’s Coastal Range; a stretch through the bone-dry gravel and trails of the Sonoran Desert in Arizona; and a final week of pre-riding the tallgrass prairie of Kansas ahead of Unbound Gravel.

While it was just a month, that three-part breakdown gave me significant insight into the groupset’s strengths and quirks, while subjecting it to plenty of stress. After some challenging 50 hours on the system, here’s what I’ve concluded.

A Long Time Coming

TRP’s Vistar drivetrain has been a long time coming. Media were given sneak peeks at the Sea Otter and Eurobike expos in 2024, and some prototypes were ridden at Unbound in 2024 as well. The Classified hub, meanwhile, has been around for several years now. Cycling Weekly reviewed it back in 2021 and again at Unbound Gravel in 2022. I guess I was late to the game as I ‘only’ tried the Classified hub for a first time in 2024 at a media camp.

The internal hub-based shifting was spec'd on an all-road bike with a Shimano drivechain. Ultimately, I felt the shifting was cool, elegant at times, but I left the few days of riding feeling like it wasn’t quite ready to be something most consumers would consider. This was due to little things like the rear hub coming a little loose, or the sprint shifter requiring some thought to make shifts at the right time, or having to keep track of which rear “ring” I was in. These deficiencies, from my perspective, seemed to stem from the fact that the Classified system was an add-on to something that: a) wasn’t theirs; and b) was replacing a Shimano front derailleur that is already very good.

The new TRP Vistar groupset addresses these issues so well that it's now a competitive option for gravel riders seeking a highly functional, capable drivetrain at a good price.

Giving the Classified Powershift a proper home

To start, it’s imperative to discuss the central draw of the groupset before we get into specifics. Despite the groupset’s TRP branding, it is inextricably linked with the Classified Powershift system. With all due respect to TRP, which deserves a lot of credit for the quality we’ll dig into later, the Classified technology is what truly defines this drivetrain.

The Classified Powershift system is an innovative piece of technology that simulates a traditional 2x setup by altering the gear ratio inside the rear hub. The first iteration launched in 2020 as the brainchild of Belgian engineers with an automotive background.

Classified is designed to be somewhat brand-agnostic, with its shifting done via a remote button; however, those setups have always required Classified-specific cassettes. With the Vistar groupset, the cassette is co-developed by TRP and Classified, and is built specifically around the Powershift hub, which now comes standard.

The gear ratio at the wide end of the spectrum remains unchanged from previous Classified drivetrains: a 1:1 ratio when the internal gearing is locked out (the hypothetical “big ring”), and a 0.7 ratio when it’s engaged (the “little ring”). Depending on which front chainring you use—I tested 46t, 48t, and 50t setups—that range mimics the gear jumps of a Shimano 2x crankset.

The cassette I tested was an 11–40t, the widest range available. While Classified has offered this size before, the key update with Vistar is greater cassette variety. That includes three road-focused options optimised for the shorter cage TRP rear derailleur, and two gravel options paired with the longer cage variant. The gravel-specific derailleur is a TRP-exclusive design—easy to adjust, impressively precise, and reasonably quick.

Switching from Shimano's mechanical GRX to TRP’s electronic shifting took some getting used to, but that’s par for the course with any move to electronic. In fact, compared to SRAM’s electronic systems, TRP’s felt, if anything, quicker.

The Classified Powershift hub is even more responsive than the rear derailleur, shifting instantly across the cassette range, which helped smooth my adaptation to the new groupset. I found this especially useful in the desert riding I did, as the ability to shift under load was key when navigating the drops, washes, and steep pitches of blown-out desert two-track.

I used the gravel-specific derailleur to accommodate the bigger range, but I plan to swap it for the shorter cage road version to test its road performance. In theory, that setup should shift even faster. The swap should be simple, thanks to the wireless derailleur, which pairs easily to the shifters via the bar-end command unit. All hub shifting is controlled through the rear thru-axle, which also handles charging duties.

Both systems lasted about 16 hours before the bar-end command centre signalled it was time to recharge. That said, the rear derailleur did lose connection with the shifter on a few occasions. Swapping in fresh batteries usually resolved it; other times, simply lifting and dropping the rear wheel reconnected the system. It’s something I’ll be monitoring long-term. In total, there are three batteries: two in the bar end unit and one for the rear derailleur. The Classified hub is powered by it through the axle, which is charged by a protected Micro USB port.

Shifting the hub works just like shifting between chainrings. Programmed synchronised shifting behaves just as smoothly as with a 2x system. And now that controls use a standard electronic layout, gone are the days of accidentally jumping to the wrong “ring.” Most importantly, though, the simplicity and customisability of a 1x system anchors the whole experience.

TRP's impressive stopping power and elite feel

TRP is a longtime component company that has cut its teeth on the mountain bike side with a full slate of brakes and a few earnest attempts at drivetrain development. For drop bars, TRP is very popular among single-speed enthusiasts with the Hylex drop bar brakes and levers. Some of my more experienced colleagues even remember the days TRP was popular in cyclocross before the introduction of hydraulic discs.

While the Hylex does have a conversion kit to make it Shimano Di2 capable, the Vistar groupset is the first full drop-bar groupset from the brand. Even though Vistar is only the first groupset from the brand, its legacy as a top-tier brake manufacturer is evident. I may have come to this groupset to explore the Classified integration, but I stayed for the TRP core

As soon as I felt the hoods and the brakes, I knew I was at home on the groupset. Braking performance stood out from the get-go, especially in the damp conditions of the Pacific Northwest. I was riding along the Pacific Coast, mostly on old logging roads that snake through old-growth forests and brutally steep terrain. Here, the paved roads are often soaked and covered in a thin layer of muck. When the roads are gravel, they are muddy, with traction changing corner to corner depending on how the ground holds or sheds water. All of it demands precise speed control.

In those demanding conditions, TRP’s brakes delivered a level of modulation and stopping power on par with any two-piston brakes I’ve used. That braking power is paired with brake levers that are only a bit larger than an old rim brake variety. A smooth and long pull offers the ability to feather the brakes well, preventing overbraking that is easy to do when the surface is so slick. The smaller hood shape further increases this precision by allowing a better grip of the lever when braking on the hoods.

While I have never had problems with other electronic hoods being too big, the smaller hood shape was a nice addition, regardless, and I’d imagine riders with smaller hands will especially benefit from them. Control aside, the smaller hoods are also simply more comfortable, leaving me with less hand fatigue on the longer rides, which were numerous leading up to Unbound. While my Unbound race was not a success for me (a story for another time), the comfort of these hoods was a huge reason why I was committed to running the groupset at the race despite having had so little experience with the drivetrain.

Small quirks in a broader, positive picture

Big picture, there’s very little to fault in the Vistar groupset; just a few points worth flagging.

The most obvious complaint is weight, which is nothing new to Classified systems. The system is undeniably heavier than other top-tier groupsets on the market. In my case, swapping from mechanical GRX to Vistar on my Rodeo Labs Trail Donkey 4.0 increased the build weight from 19.2 to 20.8 pounds.

While that’s a sizable jump, it’s not a perfect apples-to-apples comparison. So, to use TRP’s claimed weights, the difference between Vistar and Shimano GRX Di2—its most comparable rival— is about 268 grams, using a DT Swiss 350 hub as a stand in and excluding rim weight.

Efficiency is the other touch point where some might be hesitant. With internal gear changes instead of a traditional hub, it is impossible to eliminate all the inefficiency that comes from the added resistance from internal gearing. Classified claims, through a thoroughly researched white paper, that the inefficiency equals around 1% increased drag. Classified argues that the 1% of drag is easily made up for in the aerodynamics and chainline efficiency of a 1x chainring design.

Anecdotally, I never felt a noticeable drop in power transfer. That said, there is a subtle difference in feel with the slightest bit of resistance present when the internal gear is engaged.

I should note that I opted not to use a TRP crankset. I did this because 1.) at the moment, TRP does not make a specific T47 bottom bracket; 2.) I wanted to retain the same power meter I had been using for training consistency, and 3. The teeth profile of the TRP chainring was much shallower than the Garbaruk chainrings I have been using over the last year.

Chain drop has been a challenge for me in the past, especially at Unbound, and with a larger teeth profile on a 1x that risk is greatly mitigated. I have yet to drop a chain with a Garbaruk chainring, and I have used a selection of them for over a year. The Garbaruk/TRP mashup’s only downside was a bit of drag in the larger cogs on the cassette, but that is a fair tradeoff for the security that comes from the larger teeth. The largest cogs were still effective even in adverse, gritty conditions.

Weights and Prices

Where does it fit in comparison to the mainstays of the groupset market

Overall, the cost of the Vistar groupset is around $2506.87, which includes the rear hub but no rims. For reference, a Shimano GRX Di2 groupset retails for $2,541, and SRAM Red XPLR AXS is $3,530. With the Classified system, it is hard to make a direct comparison, with most groupsets not including the cost of one hub. But with Vistar, the Classified hub is required.

Still, beyond the $899 hub, the Vistar group is competitive in its pricing with shifter/brakes running $249.99 each, a gravel cassette at $209.99, and the rear mech at $370.99. While that hub cost is a big chunk of change, as Classified has grown, so too have the number of rim options at different price points. I tested the groupset with a pair of Classified G19 rims, which are solid but not spectacular.

Classified is still a luxury good in cycling, and that doesn’t fundamentally change with the Vistar groupset. What is nice to see, however, is that TRP has furnished the Classified hub inside an impressive groupset with a great deal of customisation options – all without pushing the price threshold of other high-end groupsets.

Ultimately, I came away from this test with a great deal of affection for the groupset. I am excited to try a road configuration next, because I believe it might be an even better use case for the group. But as a gravel groupset, it has real upside that brings distinct benefits to the market in a unique way. If you are looking to shake things up, or perhaps have a bike that is not UDH compatible, I’d recommend taking a serious look at TRP Vistar.

The brand's latest release is a refined version of the previous Ares shoe — Specialized's top-of-the-line road cycling shoe, worn by the likes of Primoz Roglić, Demi Vollering and Tim Merlier.

The updated Ares aims to enhance comfort and ergonomics—factors Specialized identifies as crucial for maximising power transfer and reducing localised pressure on key areas of the foot. To achieve these improvements, Specialized says it analysed more than 100,000 3D foot scans to optimise the foot-shoe-pedal interaction and boost overall system efficiency.

“With a complete suite of ergonomically designed, scientifically proven Body Geometry innovations—including the all-new Body Geometry Last—the S-Works Ares 2 eliminates pedal lag and maximises power transfer,” Specialized said in the press kit for the new shoe.

This emphasis on “Body Geometry” has yielded a shoe with a 20% increase in contact surface inside and 44% less forefoot pressure in practice. All things considered, the new shoe provides a claimed seven-watt increase to the rider’s functional threshold power if the rider also uses other Body Geometry products and innovations like refined cleat position and custom footbeds.

Yet, arguably, the most talked-about aspect of the Ares 2 isn’t its construction or updated materials; it is its steep price, which ranges from $450/£375 to $600/£479.

The price of gear is a somewhat touchy subject in gear reviews. On one hand, reviews are an assessment of quality, not necessarily value. Value is, after all, highly subjective. However, when prices are raised by such magnitudes that they potentially shift the cost of the entire product market, it is impossible to ignore. The Ares 2 is a clear-cut example of that.

From the onset of the test, the balance between the shoe's performance and cost was at the front of my mind as I tried to parse through my ultimate verdict. Fundamentally, the question that kept coming to my mind, and the one that has guided my review, is: What is the cost of a seven-watt gain?

Specs

• Model: S-Works Ares 2
• Intended use: road racing
• Outsola: Unidirectional carbon
• Closure: BOA® Fit System featuring Dual-Dial Li2
• Weight: 263g (size 43)
• Size tested: 43
• RRP: $599.99

The Body Geometry of it all

As was the case with the Specialized Torch released last year, Specialized has doubled down on its Body Geometry philosophy, which is based on the brand's ergonomic research and biomechanical testing to optimise rider fit and performance.

Body Geometry heavily influenced the shoe's updates, particularly around the potential to maximise power transfer through body alignment and ergonomics.

Specialized breaks it down into four general elements: the Varus Wedge, Metatarsal Button, Longitudinal Arch and Body Geometry Last. These four elements each touch on a different adjustment the shoes make.

Varus Wedge refers to the shoe's 1.5-degree tilt towards the outside of the pedal. This rotation allows the rider's knee to track vertically throughout the downstroke of the pedalling motion, allowing for more direct power transfer to the pedals.

Similarly, correcting the engagement of the Metatarsal Button allows the shoe to have a tight fit without pinching the rider's toes, as a “button” elevates and separates the Metatarsal bones. The “Longitudinal Arch” is the shape of the shoe meant to counteract its tendency to act as a spring, once again increasing power transfer.

Lastly, the increase in the footbed size creates more room for the toes to splay, which increases comfort and diminishes the pressure on the rider's feet.

All these four elements work together to create what Specialized says is a formula to increase the wearer’s power at lactate threshold by 7 watts. Allegedly.

The Ares 2 tension is controlled by a dual Boa Fit System that incorporates the Boa’s Li2 multidirectional dials. This new and improved system, which is also on the new Giro Imperial II and Fizik Vega Carbon road shoes, provides precise tension adjustment in a two-part system that allows for the upper to contour specifically to different portions of a rider's foot. The dials themselves have also been upgraded with a new alloy construction, giving the system more durability and a nice silver aesthetic.

This, paired with a much broader and squared toe box, gives a lot of flexibility in where the shoe tightens around a rider's foot. The Boa dials themselves have also been redesigned to provide more precise tension control while retaining the easy-to-use elements that make the BOA system usable on the go, even in race environments.

Ride feel: strong power transfer versus the ankle problem

My first ride in the Ares 2 came a few weeks before the launch in March, and I have been riding consistently in the shoes since, covering everything from long road rides, hill intervals, light gravel rides and even a criterium race. Across the different uses, the shoe was best suited for shorter efforts where acute power transfer is key, especially in sprinting. What I found was that the use cases where the shoe matched what I was looking for were much more limited than I anticipated.

One of the main design elements of the Ares, along with other Specialized shoes, is a high, rigid ankle cup intended to lock the heel and ankle of the rider in place for improved power transfer to the pedals, similar to the goal of the “Longitudinal Arch.” The problem with this design element is that the heel profile results in a unique fit that is a challenge to my anatomy. With the Ares 2, my normal shoe size was unwearable. The impingement was so severe that in the first four rides I attempted with the shoes, I had to stop within the first 45 minutes to release the boa dials to reduce the pinching sensation that made it difficult to pedal.

I ended up swapping sizes down from a 44 to a 43, which alleviated most of the discomfort around the ankle/heel area, but it did create a much tighter fit in the front of the shoe. It was workable with thin socks, and my foot felt very secure. However, the feeling of the shoe's construction was always on my mind when pedalling.

Every time I changed my cadence or stood up out of the saddle, I would be reminded of the tight heel or the cramped toe box. For shorter rides, the locked-in feeling and solid power transfer would outweigh the fit restrictions. But anything over three hours began to feel like a chore, and I would find myself loosening the Boa-dials at different points to offer a reprieve for different parts of my feet.

As for the seven watts added to my threshold power? Who’s to say? What I can tell you is I was not suddenly adjusting the power zones ascribed to my workouts.

Lastly, the cleat attachment was also strange and limiting, with only minor forward and backwards adjustability. The sliding bolts, which are standard on three-hole cleat designs, did not slide easily. After a while of working on the shoe to get the cleats back in the position I normally use, I was able to find the right location, but it was a challenge and not a task I hope to do again. Beware if you have similar fit demands.

Finding the footing of a new aesthetic

The Ares 2 does shine in its aesthetic improvement. The shoe's overall shape was redesigned to suit more foot shapes, and the result is a striking design.

The pair I tested came in white with silver accents. The white body of the shoe is complete with rubber toe reinforcements, which create a blunted, built-up yet not bulky look that is unique in the market of top-end road shoes, where narrow and sleek designs are ubiquitous. Capping that design off with the “S-Works” logo outlined in silver that matched the Boa dials creates an undeniably striking shoe that matches the bold performance claims of the Ares 2.

While white road shoes are the dominant colour these days, if you plan on making these your everyday shoes or live in a rainy area, these shoes also come in black, green and the “team issue” colourway, which has a bigger “Specialized” logo and black trim. If you do go with all white, the material is easy to clean and has held up well after regular riding, so fear not.

Verdict

A simple litmus test I use when evaluating gear is whether using it feels natural or like a chore. Some products seem to have a gravitational pull, and I find myself reaching for them repeatedly, even when other options also need testing. Others I use selectively and with care, making sure their quirks don’t interfere with the kind of ride I want to have.

More often than not, this divide comes down to cost. Cheaper gear is usually not as refined as its more expensive counterparts. But that comparison can be revealing. If I don’t hesitate to use a more affordable option, it’s likely a good value. On the other hand, if I find it hard to set aside the premium version, it might just be worth the upgrade.

What was surprising about the Ares 2 was that:

1) The shoes are significantly more expensive than the alternative shoes in my lineup, even other high-end road performance options, and

2) They're the shoes I always avoided wearing.

With that said, my experience with the Ares 2 should come with all the appropriate caveats: Ride feel is subjective as everyone’s feet are unique, and value is in the eye of the beholder. Still, my feet are far from abnormal. I have shoes from many different brands that have distinct pros and cons, but they are all wearable. The Ares 2 is the only pair that I fundamentally struggled with. What’s more, they cost over a hundred USD more than most of their direct competitors, and have experienced a massive price hike between iterations.

To me, it feels like Specialized is using the claimed “seven-watt” performance gain both as a marketing tool and as justification for the shoe’s steep price increase. Naturally, achieving those claimed watt-savings required the engineering and design teams to invest time and resources, diving deep into the complexities of shoe construction. The result is a product that is, presumably, very effective for some but completely ineffective for others.

Ultimately, that is a valid approach, as no product will work for every rider. But in this case, a market leader has raised the price of its flagship model so sharply in pursuit of a specific—and for many, imperceptible—performance gain that consumers may be asked to spend considerably more without necessarily experiencing the promised benefits. That shift risks not just diminishing the value of one model but skewing perceptions of value across the entire high-end shoe market.

The Imperial II builds on the legacy of the first iteration of the shoe, which was released in 2019 as a lightweight, breathable racing shoe. Much of the design elements remain the same, with thin translucent cutouts running along both sides of the shoe and two aluminium BOA dials functioning as the tightening mechanism.

Giro claims the new model has better power transfer, adding 20Nm of stiffness to the sole while keeping weight low. The claimed weight is 220g for a size 43.

While some of the design elements are new, the pricing for the new Imperial II remains consistent. This range-topper costs $449.95 MSRP (£399.99 RRP), compared to its predecessor's $424.95 MSRP. The available colourways are limited to white and black.

While the improvements might seem marginal on paper, they do add value to an already solid product, which places the Giro Imperial II as one of the premier road shoes for summer performance.

Specs

• Forged UD carbon fibre sole 
• Super breathable SYNCHWIRE™ knit upper
• Dual BOA® L2 dials 
• 3-bolt cleat compatibility
• Weight: 220g (size 43)
• Size tested: 43.5
• RRP: $449.95 / £399.99 / €449.99

Fit notes: neutral foot shape design

Every shoe has its own design quirks, and while no two shoes fit the same, the Imperial II is about as neutral as they come. The heel cup is built up, but low enough to stay out of the way mechanically, while the toe box is firmly middle of the road in terms of width. What’s more, the breathable fabric that makes up the shoe’s upper also offers flexibility that allows for the shoe to contour to different foot shapes more effectively compared to other, more rigidly built footwear options.

One area where the fit might not work for everyone is arch support or lack thereof. The insoles are thin and the built-in arm profile is on the low side. Luckily, Giro shoes do run fairly true to size, and third-party insoles should fit to make amends to that lower profile.

The Imperial II’s fit is aided by the use of a dual Boa Fit System that incorporates the company’s Li2 multidirectional dials. This new and improved system is a popular option among higher-end models, as it can be found on the latest offerings from Specialized and Fizik as well. The system provides precise tension adjustment, helping the shoe upper to contour specifically to different portions of a rider's foot. The dials themselves have also been upgraded with a new alloy construction, giving the system more durability as well as a pleasing metallic aesthetic.

On the Imperial II, these two Boa dials sit on the outside of the shoe, slightly lower than the previous model, and the wires criss-cross over a separate inner tongue of the shoe. This design works together with the breathable upper to secure the foot, unlike the Fizik and Specialized models, which use an upper dial to wrap the material over the top of the foot. While the Giro design provides slightly less security, it uses less fabric, which helps reduce weight and maintain a more streamlined, symmetrical structure on both sides of the shoe.

The shoe’s breathability comes from a one-piece woven TPU fabric. TPU, which is short for thermoplastic polyurethane, is a synthetic material that has the characteristics of rubber and plastic. In recent years, TPU has become the go-to material for lightweight inner tubes, but in the case of these shoes, the TPU fabric is a thin weave that runs around the front half of the shoe.

Ride feel: the right companion for a long day, both on and off road

A good shoe is at its best when it goes unnoticed. With the Imperial II, the power of the shoe to disappear jumped out immediately.

I have been riding in the shoes regularly for around a month now on rides ranging from short intensive road rides, to long hot endurance rides on mixed surfaces. The shoe has excelled in each of the different use cases, but in particular on the long, hot days. The ability for the feeling to fade into the background has been striking, especially compared to other shoes I have in for testing. While it might lag behind those other, more built-up options in terms of raw power transfer, the comfort difference is massive.

This comfort has encouraged me to try to squeeze more out of the shoe in terms of use cases beyond simple road rides. As the testing went on, I felt pulled to put road pedals on my gravel bike for gravel rides where I was unlikely to have to step off the bike and scramble over rocks. Once this started, I found my mind wandering, as I cruised down bumpy gravel roads, about gravel races where I could get away with wearing these shoes over the other two-bolt off-road options I have.

Not only would some power transfer efficiency be gained, but sheer comfort would also be a big benefit. The shoe's upper's breathability and material flexibility make it dynamic enough to meet the demands of racing for many hours over tumultuous surfaces.

The one true downside of the shoe's off-road capacity is that its material holds a lot of dirt and dust and is difficult to clean fully. A month of mixed-surface riding has added a brown tinge that is hard to get rid of, but there is always the black colourway if you don’t fancy the clean white aesthetic.

For road riding, I struggle to find any real flaws. As I'm entering another long, hot summer in Arizona, the Imperial II is a great companion that will certainly remain in the shoe rotation.

The verdict

The Imperial II doesn’t seek to reinvent the road shoe, and that's okay. Instead, it builds on its predecessor's success, refining key elements, reinforcing smart design choices and enhancing the subtle details that matter. The result is a high-performance, versatile road shoe that excels in everyday use.

Across hard climbs, light gravel, and hot, long road rides, the Giro Imperial II has quickly become my go-to option. With its light and airy upper, the shoe handles the heat of the late Arizona spring incredibly well, while still providing enough support for an interval session or race-type rides.

As road shoes, they cover all the bases that a top-of-the-line shoe should provide. And for those veering off-road as well, the flexibility of the upper allows for a tight shoe that still has some give during the bumpy moments, though the fabric is tough to keep clean.

The ‘In-Route’ name refers to cable integration, as with a compatible stem, all cables can be run fully internally for a neater, more aerodynamic design. ENVE lists the suitable stems on their website, with most of the major brands mentioned.

These bars came fitted to the rather nice ENVE Fray all-road bike I’ve been riding recently (paired with ENVE’s In-Route Aero Stem), and the AR in the bar’s name stands for ‘All-road’ too, making them the perfect match for the Fray. As such, I’ve ridden them on-road as well as some light off-road.

Construction

ENVE says that the carbon laminate used to make the SES AR Road In-Route Handlebar is AR-specific for ‘comfort over all terrains’. Presumably, this means that there is slightly more compliance in this bar than in their aero model, for instance.

There are cable ports which allow any wires and hoses to be run either entirely internally through the handlebar and stem or neatly contained within the runnel underneath the bars if integration isn’t possible (or desired). These holes and details are very nicely finished with lovely, smooth edges.

The bars are available in five different widths from 38cm to 46cm in 2cm increments, with the drops 5cm wider than the measurement at the hoods. This is because the bars flare fairly significantly (for road bars), not only in the usual top-to-bottom direction but also in the front-to-back dimension. Therefore, the widest point of the whole handlebar is the final few centimetres before the bar end plugs - the test bars were size 40cm (45cm at the drops). Elsewhere, the bars are a fairly standard compact 76mm reach and 127cm drop.

The tops are flattened for aerodynamics right up to the stem clamping area, making the fitting of things like lights or a computer less than straightforward, whilst the forward bend between the tops and the hoods is quite abrupt.

ENVE’s given weights are 242g, 254g, 260g, 273g and 290g, respectively. As the test bike was fully assembled on arrival with bar tape fitted and all cables routed through both the bars and the stem, I didn’t take it all apart to weigh the components independently. ENVE’s claimed weights aren’t groundbreaking anyway and seem eminently plausible.

The ride

The flattened tops of the bars were a pleasant place to be - comfortable but not overly wide or deep with just enough compliance to take the edge off without in any way feeling spongy. The severe 90° bend to the hoods allowed the full width of the tops to be used and also provided a nice position for the heel of the hand when you're not fully forward on the hoods.

When riding in the drops by the levers, the compact curve was perfect for control and comfort, keeping the brakes and shifters in easy reach. However, the flare meant that it wasn’t ideal for keeping my elbows tucked in for the kind of aero advantage you’d probably be looking for if riding in the drops. My wrists, elbows and shoulders simply didn’t seem to work that way, and I ended up with my elbows sticking out a bit - perhaps riders with greater flexibility wouldn’t find it an issue.

Furthermore, I didn’t really understand the purpose of the additional flare towards the bar ends - by my reckoning, the handlebars were 3cm wider at the ends than by the levers. Sure, wider bars give better control, but generally speaking, on the kind of terrain where I need more control I also quite like having my brakes within reach too, so that extra flare seemed superfluous.

Luckily, the bike came with a computer mount that fitted into the stem faceplate, as otherwise mounting one would have been very difficult, given that there is very little suitable, round, real estate on the handlebar. Ditto mounting lights, bells or any other handlebar accessories. This might be understandable on a race-oriented handlebar where aerodynamics and speed are the priority, but it is a bit limiting on a more all-round bar. I would happily sacrifice a watt or two for a couple more centimetres of 31.8mm bar on which to fasten my front light. Fitting a compatible light to a Go-Pro fitting on the K-Edge computer mount was a possibility, but would limit lighting options.

In the main, the SES AR Road In-Route Handlebar was very comfortable so long as I stayed on the tops or forward in the drops, away from the slightly awkward extra flare. Whether riding with gloves or without, I suffered no problems in terms of numbness or vibrations and out-of-the-saddle efforts didn’t cause any noticeable flex. I am not in the position to comment on the bar’s aero credentials, but it’s always nice psychologically to see as little material as possible hitting the air at the front of a bike.

Value and conclusion

As I’ve suggested above, these are right at the top end of the price range for a separate handlebar (not a one-piece bar/stem combo), and at £440 / $450 a pop, it is very hard to suggest that they are great value, particularly as they are nothing particularly special weight-wise. The shape and flare on the drops also didn’t suit me particularly well, but I can see where they are coming from - trying to offer a premium all-road (as opposed to race-orientated) set of bars that should work well on bikes such as ENVE’s Fray across a variety of surfaces.

I certainly liked the shape of the upper part of the bars and appreciated the extra width that the sharp transition towards the hoods allowed, and I accept that other riders might well get on better with the flare of the drops, too. Furthermore, the bars are stiff and compliant in all the appropriate places, and are beautifully made in terms of quality of finish, but whether that all adds up to £440 / $450 worth of handlebars is another question.

The current version of the Estro, the Estro Mips, has been around since November 2021. It admirably fulfils its remit as a mid-priced, lightweight, well-ventilated helmet that’s versatile enough to wear many hats, so to speak.

Met has quietly marketed it as a multi-purpose road, cross and gravel helmet since launch, but it’s always enjoyed more of a roadie vibe, in part due to the predominance of bright colours and slick, shiny finishes.

Now, Met has included it in its Wander gravel capsule collection, which also includes the higher-end Trenta Wander and entry-level Allroad Wander helmets. “Wandering isn't just about physical movement; it's a state of mind, a celebration of the spirit of exploration that resides within us all,” suggests Met seductively. Hmm.

So, what sets these helmets apart from their non-wander counterparts? As already alluded, nothing more than a lick of matt paint in earthy hues and a free feed bag. Yet, if that’s what it takes to get the gravel riders to consider the Estro, I’m all for this cosmetic refresh. Arguably, the Estro has always been a better choice for gravel than tarmac, but up until now, it has been nobbled by its roadie looks.

Construction

The Estro Wander is blessed with a good number of features that make it an attractive lid for gravel grinders. First off, the overall shape is more reminiscent of a mountain bike helmet, especially around the rear. Here, the helmet body extends further down towards the nape of the neck, cradling and protecting the back of the skull. Around the front, the pterion - the thinnest and weakest part of the skull just behind the temples - is similarly well protected.

Ventilation is taken care of by 26 vents, of which 17 are inlets and nine are exhaust ports clustered at the rear of the helmet. This is one airy lid, a feature that lends itself to slow-moving gravel rides more than fast-paced road rides.

Like the vast majority of helmets on the market, the main body is constructed from expanded polystyrene (EPS) foam, topped with a thin polycarbonate shell that protects from general wear and UV damage. Met boasts that this shell covers the entire helmet, which is disingenuous because the inverted Y-shaped EPS structure that surrounds the exhaust ports is completely exposed.

Met has equipped the Estro Wanderer with Mips (Multi-directional Impact Protection), albeit the less premium, less integrated MIPS-C2 version, characterised by the thin bright yellow liner.

Retention is courtesy of Met’s well-regarded Safe-T Upsilon system, essentially a 360° belt that tightens via a rotary dial on the external face of the rear cradle. The cradle can also be adjusted for height on a notched slider by yanking it up or down.

The soft webbing chin straps are adjustable at the sliders just below the earlobes, another helpful feature rarely found on many helmets that cost twice as much.

The ride

For better or worse, aesthetics influence helmet purchase decisions enormously. Are we likely to buy a safe, comfy helmet that doesn’t look the part? Probably not. In this respect, the Estro Wander scores highly, provided you like orangey red. It’s a damn handsome helmet that’s benefitted from a new finish, but it is only available in the one fired earth colourway. That’s Cinnamon, according to Met, but it looks more like terracotta to me. The light blue chin straps look fantastic against the terracotta shell – an inspired colour pairing that summons memories of the dry earth and clear skies of past summers.

My head circumference measures 59cm, which usually places me bang between M and L sizes, both of which are often a poor compromise. However, the Safe-T Upsilon retention system does a great job with my size large sample helmet, providing me with a comfortable and secure fit. The padding around the adjustment band is fairly minimal but adequate – a 240mm strip around the forehead area plus some silicone buffers on the cradle. Additionally, the crown is cushioned by four slender padded strips attached to the Mips liner with hook and loop.

A secure fit is, of course, critical for safety, but it’s also irritating to have to endure a helmet that loosely crashes about your ears the moment you transition from smooth tarmac to gravel trails. The Estro performed well in this regard; it feels exceptionally planted without any pressure hot spots emerging, even during longer rides. The cradle is slightly fiddly to adjust for height, but dialling in the volume is straightforward, even if feedback from the adjustment wheel is a little vague.

The Mips-C2 liner is notorious for catching hair and reducing airflow, but it has been well implemented here because I did not experience either issue. However, I do have short hair, so riders with long locks may fare differently.

The chin straps are easy to tension for length, and the sliders below the ears instantly cure ‘flappy strappy’ syndrome. I wish more helmets were this adjustable. The webbing isn’t lined with velvety microfibre or anything similar, but it’s already beautifully soft against the skin straight out of the box.

Ventilation is simply superb. Before I switched to a Lazer Z1 as my primary lid, I rocked a Kask Valegro, two of the most ventilated helmets on the market with premium prices to match. Honestly, the Estro feels just as airy in the current 25°C / 77°F spring sunshine, and I have high hopes for this helmet when the mid-summer heat kicks in.

At 310g for a size large, this helmet isn’t as light as the more upmarket Lazer Z1 (265g) in the same size, but that can be explained by the additional coverage that the Estro provides. Indeed, I found it reassuring to have my head enveloped in more EPS foam during my gravel rides, but I can only assume it’s safer. Met doesn’t provide stats to back this up, and helmet safety is complex.

So, it’s weightier than a dedicated lightweight road helmet, but that doesn’t make it heavy. I loathe the top-heavy pendulum effect you feel with properly weighty helmets, but trust me, that sensation doesn’t rear its ugly head here.

One of my pet hates is riding with the front of my helmet constantly drumming against the top bar of my riding glasses. It’s like water torture without the damp patch, and it’s one of the reasons I switched away from the Kask Valegro, a reliable culprit. The prospect of this was a pre-ride concern with the low-riding Estro, but I need not have worried. Although the Estro does sit comparatively low around its entire circumference, it doesn’t interfere with my line of sight or my oversized Rudy Project Kelion riding glasses. Riding glasses can be docked in the lower front vents when not perched on your nose.

Let’s not forget the free bag. Most helmets are bundled with a soft storage pouch, but Met has upped the ante by including a matching, Cinnamon-coloured, silky musette printed with attractive Wander graphics. It’s just a bit of fun; a well-made, pleasantly designed treat that can be used as a storage bag or a luxurious feed bag. The strap is broad and comfortable, if a little short.

Value and conclusions

On the face of it, the Estro Wander is little more than a marketing exercise for Met, yet there is substance here. With its generous coverage, excellent ventilation and comfortable (for me, at least) fit, the Estro is a great gravel helmet priced reasonably at £124.99. Of course, nothing is stopping you, other than aesthetics, from wearing it for your road rides, too. Frankly, who’s going to notice and who cares?

The Specialised Loma is a similarly specced multi-surface helmet that comes in a little cheaper at £90/$119.99. It features MIPS and has been awarded a 5-star safety rating by Virginia Tech. The Loma is available in four matt colours too, including Deep Orange, which is similar to Met’s Cinnamon.

Giro’s Syntax Mips helmet also offers deeper coverage that makes it suitable for both tarmac and trails. Colour choice is fairly limited to variations of black and white, and it’s a similar price to the Estro Wander at £129.99/$129.95.

So, it’s quite possible to pick up fairly similar helmets at relatively similar price points. As always, the deciding factor in any helmet purchase should be fit. OK, and colour too…

Specs

• Sizes: S M L
• Weight: 310 for size L
• Mips: Yes. MIPS-C2
• Colours: Cinnamon
• Optional extra: Rear light

Yes, I could have gone down the traditional route of stuffing my rear pockets, but frankly, I’d rather have my eyeballs extracted without anaesthetic. What is it about cycling? No other pastime I can think of requires participants to tuck away the stuff they’re likely to need fast and frequently in a spot that’s both unreachable and unseeable. Yep, I’m no fan of largely inaccessible, small, sweaty rear jersey pockets, particularly on long rides.

My Explore Bar Bag purchase, on the other hand, paid off handsomely. It carries more style kudos than bulging pockets and doubles up as a shoulder bag, making it super versatile, especially for travel. Hence the ‘explore’ moniker. It's not a feature that many of the best handlebar bags have, either.

Unfortunately, it’s not all great news. Read on to discover whether your ride essentials are better off ‘in the bag’ or, despite my prejudice, ‘in the pocket’.

Construction

Measuring approximately 75mm x 120mm x 245mm, the Explore Bar Bag is relatively modest in size, yet it’s capacious enough to carry essentials for a day ride without overwhelming your handlebar real estate. Rapha doesn’t publish the bag’s capacity, but it’s about 2.3 litres by my back-of-the-envelope calculations.

The primary material is rugged ripstop nylon, which, with its pronounced texture and matt finish, could pass for a tightly woven canvas. It certainly feels both hard-wearing and robust. It’s PU coated on its inside face, and all major seams are taped, making it reliably water resistant.

There are two zipped pockets: a main compartment that accounts for most of the bag’s capacity and a slim, no-frills pouch built into the front panel. The chunky plastic zippers are heavy-duty, but they’re not waterproof. However, each is concealed behind a storm flap to keep the worst of the weather at bay, and both have extended rubberised pull cords to ensure the sliders are easy to grab hold of.

The main compartment is quite spartan, with only a band of elasticated webbing to help organise its contents. The slim front pocket is completely featureless internally, but it boasts a small webbing strip on its outside face to hold a light or reflector. Additionally, the storm flap that conceals the front pocket is coated with a thin synthetic rubber strip to resist wear and add a touch of visual interest. On my black sample bag, the Rapha logo is neatly embroidered in white stitching in the lower right corner. Other colourways feature self-coloured embroidery for a more subtle look.

The Explore Bar Bag features three straps plus a short length of elasticated shock cord. A pair of narrow (200mm x 20mm) straps and corresponding plastic loops are securely stitched into the back of the bag, one top right and the other top left. It’s these straps, which are backed with self-engaging hook and loop, that fasten the bag to the bars. The shock cord then wraps around the head tube or headset spacers to reduce any unwanted movement.

The shoulder strap, which is much longer and slightly broader (1200mm x 25mm), converts the Explore Bar Bag into a cross-body bag or waist bag for off-bike use. It emerges from each side and fastens with a robust, adjustable, quick-release plastic clasp.

A sleek, soft Hypalon (synthetic rubber) rear panel elegantly conceals the stitching that permanently anchors all three straps to the bag and, in theory, protects your bike’s headtube from scratches. Vitally, the straps are supposed to be stowed behind the Hypalon panel when not in use.

The ride

Attaching the Explore Bar Bag is child’s play, and I say that after trying it on a wide variety of bikes and bars. The process is so quick and easy that it elevates this bag above much of its competition. Hook and loop (commonly known as Velcro) makes for such a simple system that attaching or removing the bag takes me 30 seconds, if that. To hook up the bag, loosely secure one strap by threading it around the bar, through the plastic loop and back on itself, then repeat with the other strap. If necessary, adjust the bag’s final position before tightening both. Lastly, tie the shock cord around the stem or head tube. To remove the bag, simply reverse the process.

In my experience, the straps are long enough to mount this bag on most flat-topped aero road bars, as sacrilegious as that may sound to some. It will even piggyback on top of much larger bikepacking bags. Once in place, the bag is very secure, and the straps are low profile enough not to be too irksome. On my 42cm bars, it’s also small enough not to interfere much with my hands when riding on the tops.

Converting the bag from a bar bag to a shoulder bag is a little fiddly because it can take a while to stuff the two smaller straps behind the large Hypalon panel. Once the process is complete though, the result is both tidy and convincing. In shoulder bag mode, there’s little visual clue that this could be a bar bag and vice versa.

Loading it up is straightforward enough because it doesn’t present many options. The main compartment is my default place for kit - I rarely use the front pocket unless I’m carrying something slim, such as a passport, a Hiplok Z Lok or an additional pair of riding glasses for changing conditions. Talking of which, I’ve ridden with my Explore Bar Bag through everything from light showers to brief but heavy rainstorms, and the contents have remained dry. That said, I wouldn’t trust it to take a proper dunking or weather a prolonged deluge.

Why would anyone want a bar bag that readily doubles as a shoulder bag? Well, this bag is in its element during bike-packing breaks or off-road adventures. During my Spanish trip, it enabled me to stop at grocery shops, cafés and restaurants, safe in the knowledge that I could quickly grab my prized possessions to take with me. My passport, cash, cards, phone and more were always to hand, saving me having to rummage through my Tailfinn Aeropack or my frame bag. Small, accessible and contained – everywhere I went, on-bike or off, this modest bag and its valuable little payload went too.

It is, of course, suitable for more than just extended travel trips. I’ll rarely take it on very short rides, but if I plan to be out for a couple of hours or more it gets stuffed with a packable rain jacket, multitool, mini pump, spare tube, levers, phone and snacks. Its modest size and near instant deployment make it the perfect day pack. Well, almost.

Unfortunately, there is, quite literally, a snag. The zip for the main compartment can be a devil to open or close if you fail to get the two sides – tape or teeth – aligned. It seems to be luck of the draw, one day it will close with ease, the next it can take a good minute or two. Consequently, this is not a bag you’ll want to unzip during an active part of a ride, which will limit its use for some cyclists.

A more minor irritation is the shoulder strap length, which may be on the short side for taller cyclists. I’m 191cm tall and it’s just about OK as a cross-body bag.

Value and Conclusions

Bar bags will always be ‘Marmite’ products because, despite their positive attributes, they negatively influence a bike’s aerodynamics. What’s more, they spoil the lines of any drop-bar road bike.

If, however, you’re more concerned by practicalities than aesthetics, or value everyday functionality over out-and-out speed, then a small bag like this makes a lot of sense. Certainly, they’re a no-brainer for gravel riding and bike-packing.

Ortlieb's 3-litre waterproof Velo-Sling is possibly the Explore Bar Bag’s closest competitor. It’s slightly larger, which may or may not be a good thing, fully waterproof and has a wide, removable strap that repurposes it as a shoulder bag. The closure system is magnetic too, making it much easier to open than the Explore Bar Bag. It is more expensive at £81/$95.

Apidura offers a similarly sized bag, the 2-litre Racing Handlebar Pack, for a fraction more at £70/$93. It doesn’t convert to a shoulder bag, but it is fully waterproof. Restrap’s characterful little 1.5-litre Cannister Bag shares some similarities with the Explore Bar Bag, but it doesn’t convert into a shoulder bag either. It is, however, waterproof and provides a cheaper alternative at £49.99/$74.99.

Zefal’s option, the 2.5-litre Z Adventure F2, is neither a shoulder bag nor is it fully waterproof, but it’s very affordable at €39.95.

To sum up, the Rapha Explore Bar Bag may carry a premium price, but its versatile, well-thought-out design offers an additional layer of functionality that few other bags can match. In my opinion, it’s also one of the more attractive small bags on the market. It’s such a shame the main zip lets it down.

Specs

• Material: Ripstop Nylon
• Dimensions (approx.): 75mm x 120mm x 245mm
• Capacity (approx.): 2.3 litres
• Weight: 165g

We spoke to the founder of the size-inclusive, technical clothing brand Petrichor Projects in depth last year about her goal of creating a pair of the best women's bib shorts. But can one design truly fit all of us? Is it possible to scale from size XXS to XXXL while making the perfect pair of shorts for everyone?

Construction

There are three main points of interest regarding the anatomy of a pair of cycling bibshorts: the shorts, the bibs, and the pad.

Deconstructing the shorts into these fundamental parts is an effective way to understand Petrichor Projects' design and construction process. Starting with the shorts themselves, the 002 women's bib shorts use what the brand calls 'a matt, mid compression fabric.'

It's composed of ECONYL, a fabric made from 'regenerated nylon yarns.' This fabric is generally considered more sustainable than traditional nylon and regarded as a better alternative to using virgin nylon. We would need a standalone feature to discuss ECONYL's full credentials so, in summary, its yarns are made from 100% nylon waste rather than recycled bottles.

The issue with the latter was discussed when I explored the problem of greenwashing in the cycling industry. Although it's worth noting that ECONYL will still shed microplastics through washing and wearing.

Turning to the athletic performance of the fabric, Petrichor Projects claims that it's supportive and comfortable, without transparency, and boasts a UPF 50+ rating.

There's also a right-side leg pocket and a couple of reflective tabs at the rear of each leg, along with a reflective logo on the left.

Inside the shorts sits a 'pre-shaped' anatomic cut Elastic Interface chamois. The brand states that the flat surface pad uses gradual areas of transition to create a high-density insert. The top layer offers natural antibacterial properties and is made from recycled fabric, engineered with increased airflow at the front of the pad. The garment also reaches OEKO-TEX® Standard 100 certification, which indicates that a textile product has been tested for harmful substances and is safe for human health.

Holding the shorts up is the all-important bib element. The up-and-over arm fit of the wide strap has been constructed to sit beside the breast area to minimise pressure points.

The very interesting tech on offer here is the shorts' 'easy pee' design, which enables the right-side strap to detach from the shorts thanks to a magnetic clip. A handy fabric loop has been added to the strap to assist with strap relocation post-use.

Putting the shorts on the scales, they hit the 165g mark. To put that into perspective, the size medium Assos Women's UMA GTV Bib Shorts C2 are 185g, the 150g Velocio Women's Ultralight Bib Shorts, and 210g for the size medium Endura Women's FS260-Pro Bibshort.

The ride

Pulling on the PP002 women's bib shorts, I immediately noted the compression. They are just the right side of supportive and provide a feeling of being held together rather than restricted.

The brand has placed the side pocket in just the right location. However, if you plan to pair them with overshorts, you'll need to wait for Petrichor Projects to release a specific corresponding pair to maintain access, as none of my overlayers' access points aligned.

In general, the fit is excellent. The bibs lay nicely in position and aren't even noticeable once on, in a good way.

When it comes to the padding, I personally found it too big for the size of the shorts. Due to its high density level, it wasn't the most malleable and failed to conform to my body shape. I'm 5ft6"/ 167cm and around 60-odd kilos, size UK 10/small. I've measured myself according to the Petrichor Projects size chart, and I've got the right size shorts, but the padding isn't quite right for me.

This comes with a huge caveat that padding in shorts is of course very personal – just because I find the pad too large doesn't mean that everyone else will. Passing the shorts to similarly shaped and sized Tech Writer Rachel Sokal, she found the shorts' padding way more comfortable, proving that it really is horses for courses.

What we both agreed on, however, was our joint struggle with the easy-to-pee feature. We're both not fans of the feature in general, and due to the high back of the Petrichor Projects PP002, and lightweight straps (that also frustratingly magnetically shut on themselves), we both found that a certain level of arm flexibility and a mirror was required, or in some cases, we felt you might even need external assistance.

Rachel and I have discussed the easy-to-pee shorts in general and after some back and forth, have concluded that once you have figured these out, they are the best on the market; so if you really require the feature, the Petrichor Projects PP002 will be the pick of the bunch.

We also agreed that our favourite element of the PP002 women's bib shorts was the leg finish. The printed-on silicone holds the legs perfectly in position, reducing the need for additional hems and bulk. This, teamed with the length of my thighs, made me wish that the rest of the shorts were just as perfectly tailored for me.

Value and conclusion

These are on the high-end option of easy-to-pee shorts, for US customers its the UK price, plus taxes, although shipping is free, at £165 they are almost double the price of some of the cheaper options on the market, such as the previously mentioned, Endura Women's FS260-Pro Bibshort DS.

The price point also feels a little contradictory to the brand's ethos of cycling inclusivity, which originated in the belief that mainstream performance wear was elite and priced out for many riders.

I really wanted to love the Petrichor Projects PP002 women's bib shorts. It's rare to find a female-led independent cycling apparel brand doing good things and making ethical decisions rather than opting for the cheapest or easiest choices.

Unfortunately, the pad fit just wasn't right for me so they won't become my go-to pair of black shorts. However, I would urge everyone to try them, as this wasn't an issue for CW's other female Tech Writer, so may be perfect for you.

However, if you fancy an alternative to these brilliant yet often ubiquitous bikes, then the Handsling A1R0evoS is well worth a look. Started in 2014 by ex-racer Simon Whiten, Handsling offers a small range of performance-focused bikes for road, gravel, CX, TT and track. Despite their small size, Handsling sponsors not one but two UCI Continental teams, UK-based ‘Handsling Alba’ and the brilliantly named ‘Turbo Velo Pickle Juice Cycling Team ’ in the US.

Like most brands, Handsling's carbon frames are made in the Far East, but designed by Simon and the team in Hampshire, in their own exclusive moulds.

Unlike a normal review where the test bike arrives ready-built, Handsling was keen to offer me a look at the entire buying process, which they feel is one of their USPs when compared to the bigger brands. Thus, I found myself, slightly jetlagged after an overnight flight into Heathrow, sipping coffee in Handsling’s Oakhanger workshop and discussing ‘my’ possible build with Simon himself. All buyers are encouraged to visit and chat about their requirements before purchasing, but phone and email conversations are also possible. It is worth emphasising that my experience was not because I was reviewing the bike, but simply part of Handsling’s usual customer service.

I’ll deal with my spec choices in the next section, but for me, a big part of Handsling’s appeal is its flexibility. As the bikes are built up in the UK, most components can be swapped out, sizes changed or omitted completely - if you already have a favourite pair of wheels or preferred saddle, for example, you're not tied into buying a part you don't need.

Another huge plus for Handsling frames is the massive choice of frame colours, with about 30 possible options, ranging from plain carbon to very sparkly flip-type paint jobs. I chose Sunset Gold, a gorgeous coppery orange and even got to talk to the chap who would be doing the paint spraying, Alfie.

After my visit, I emailed in the setup and measurements of my bike, and then had a couple of telephone calls with Rob to discuss what aspects I might like to change - for example, I chose a slightly shorter stem and narrower bars.

Construction

That paint job! Even though I’d chosen the colour myself, there is a big difference between looking at swatches and seeing the finished article in the flesh when I unboxed the bike, and it is hard to do justice to the multitude of colours apparent on the frame. Depending on the light, gold, green, orange, bronze, purple, copper and even blue make an appearance, an effect that is particularly noticeable around the curves of the bottom bracket. Alfie had done a stunning job.

Back to more technical matters. The claimed frame weight for the new A1R0evoS (launched in 2024) is 770g for a 52cm, around 200g less than for the non ‘S’ version. This has been achieved by the use of Toray 1100 carbon as opposed to Toray 800, which requires less material for the same stiffness, and adds £600 to the cost. Both frames are identical in terms of shape and geometry - another appealing aspect of the Handsling philosophy is that they don’t change the frames seasonally or particularly encourage riders to upgrade to the next, latest thing. Simon is keen that their bikes are built to last and remain on the road.

Although it is not an out-and-out aero bike, there are plenty of aero touches, with truncated D-shaped tubes, dropped seatstays and a cut-out seat tube. The hourglass head tube and fully integrated cables keep the front end extremely clean, with an extended section at the back of the head tube to reduce drag. The bottom bracket area is reassuringly chunky to not just catch the light beautifully but also to better harness power. Interestingly, it is a BB86 press fit unit rather than a mechanic-friendly threaded unit, a point that Handsling emphasises on its website as being better for performance.

New for 2025, the Advanced fork is wider and deeper for improved aero with a neat enclosed thru-axle end. The fork allows clearance for 35mm tyres. Rear tyre clearance is still a healthy 32mm.

The geometry is definitely performance-orientated, with 395mm reach and 565mm stack on my 56cm bike - identical to the SL8 and very similar to the Canyon Aeroad. However, the wheelbase of the A1R0evoS is fractionally shorter than both at 985mm, promising quick handling.

The inline seatpost and one-piece handlebar are Handsling’s own; I chose a 120mm stem and 38mm width bar to go with the bike’s racey character. Bikes also come with smart Handsling carbon bottle cages (25g each on my scales) and a K-Edge computer mount.

There is a good choice of wheels available on Handsling’s configurator and they have a long-standing partnership with Parcours, but, ever the weight-weenie, I opted for another British wheel brand and specced some Scribe Core SL50+ wheels to save a few grams and add a couple of millimetres of internal width. These wheels pushed the 30mm Pirelli P-Zero Race TLR tyres out to over 31mm in width.

Most riders would admit that Shimano Ultegra Di2 is every bit as good as Dura-Ace, except for a small weight penalty, and I fully agree with this suggestion. So, of course, I opted for a full Dura-Ace set-up - well, given the chance, you would wouldn’t you? Heart over head for sure.

Nothing contentious in the spec of the groupset with a 52/36 chainset, 11-30t cassette, and 170mm cranks, without power meter. I love the fact that with Handsling, unlike most off-the-shelf manufacturers, a ‘downgrade’ to Ultegra, for instance, does not also mean accepting cheaper wheels, bars, tyres, etc.

Weight without pedals, but with cages and mount, came in at bang on 7kg. Pretty good for a disc brake, semi-aero bike with 30mm tyres and 50mm wheels.

The ride

Years ago, a friend of mine had an Audi RS4, which I drove regularly, and I remember that it wasn’t the incredible V8 noise or monstrous performance that impressed me most, but the way that the suspension dealt with bumps whilst remaining stiff and planted on the road. The A1R0evoS reminded me of this. It is a race bike in every way, but it is also very composed on poor road surfaces. Of course, you still feel every crack, bump and piece of grit, but it is through a filter which removes the sharpest edges. No doubt the tubeless 30mm Pirelli P-Zero tyres and Scribe Core 50 SL+ wheels were doing their bit, but I am sure that the frame was also contributing a good degree of vibration absorption, making the bike less fatiguing than many race bikes.

However, step on the pedals and there is no hint of wooliness, just an instant response whether seated or standing. For a UCI-approved frame with two pro teams on its CV, this should come as no surprise, but after spending the winter on a succession of very good all-road bikes, the step up to a true race bike was still noticeable. The Handsling is longer, lower, stiffer and lighter, of course, but it is also more direct with greater responsiveness.

The short wheelbase never felt nervous, it was a joy to ride on fast, sweeping descents in Mallorca, where I found myself deliberately taking a sub-optimal line through some bends, just so that I could flick the bike over and carve round it, tightening the curve rather than straightening it, just for the fun of it. On the less-lovely roads of the Peak District, confidence was similarly high, although between potholes and gravel, there was a lot less scope for pratting about. Again, large volume tyres and wide rims played their part, but wouldn’t work nearly as well unless attached to a similarly competent frame.

Speed was never an issue (or at least not from the bike’s point of view). Whether pace-lining along the flat or gurning up a climb, the A1R0evoS played its part, providing a solid platform that encouraged big efforts. Handsling doesn’t give any aero figures, but the bike felt like it maintained speed very well.

The A1R0evoS does have a few quirks and foibles, though. First, and least important, is that the seat post clamp is rather clunky. It is a sort of double clamp whereby the part that clamps the saddle rails is itself bolted to the carbon post, and although the whole thing is light enough, it ain’t pretty. It’s worth noting that the layback version offered uses a much more standard clamp that looks a lot neater.

Secondly (and thirdly), there are lots of different bolt sizes used, from 3mm to 6mm (personally, I’d ban all 3mm bottle cage bolts!) which is a bit irritating, and some of the torque specs are way bigger than normal, eg. 12Nm for the saddle clamp and 10Nm for the seatpost. This isn’t too bad in the workshop with a torque wrench to hand, but it's pretty hard to achieve mid-ride with a multi-tool, although at least there is little danger of over-torquing them.

And finally, I found the shape of the one-piece handlebar a bit basic. Having used a few really nice, sculpted bars recently, the Handsling unit felt quite old-school. Although the tops are nicely flattened, they become round before the forward bend, making them less comfortable when holding them near the hoods. The drops curve away from you a bit too much and other designs feel more ergonomic.

However, the worst part of riding the A1R0evoS was that I was petrified of scratching the lovely paintwork. Whether leaning it against a wall outside a cafe, using metal tools near it or packing it into a bike box, I was in constant fear. A very nice problem to have, though.

Value and conclusion

I’m going to say that the Handsling A1R0evoS is good value. £9,089 for a British, custom-painted, Dura-Ace-equipped aero bike that weighs 7kg is not easy to match. It isn’t perfect, but I’d rather have the opportunity to choose my own stem and handlebar size than have a prettier saddle clamp any day.

Whilst writing a recent piece about steel and titanium bikes, it struck me that for some, the appeal isn’t just in the material but in the process and potential for customisation. This, in turn, leads to greater involvement and deeper connection with the finished product. Handsling offers a very similar proposition but with carbon rather than metal.

I certainly can’t say that the A1R0evoS is definitively faster than a Specialized S-Works Tarmac SL8, Canyon Aeroad CFR or Pinarello Dogma F, but I can say that there can’t be much in it for normal riders, and that the personalised service, chance to ride something different from the norm, and the balance of speed and comfort this bike delivers make the Handsling a very tempting proposition for anyone looking for a race bike.

Oh, and looking at that paint job never got old.

Specification

• Frame and fork: T1100 carbon with Advanced fork
• Bottom bracket: BB86
• Groupset: Shimano R9200 Dura-Ace Di2 12-speed
• Cassette: Shimano Dura-Ace 12-speed HG 11-30T
• Chainset: Shimano Dura-Ace 12-speed 52-30T, 170mm
• Brake rotors: Shimano Dura-Ace L 160mm front, 140mm rear
• Wheelset: Scribe Core SL+ 50 tubeless-ready
• Tyres: Pirelli P Zero Race TLR Black 700x30mm
• Handlebar: Handsling Race Integrated Carbon 380mm x 120mm
• Seatpost: Handsling Aero D-Shaped Seatpost
• Saddle: Selle Italia SLR Boost Carbonio
• Actual weight for size 56cm: 7kg

Need a saddle for MTB? That would be the Dimension NDR. Gravel or Cross? The Dimension AGX. Something a bit wider? The Dimension Space. A saddle specifically for women? The Dimension EVA. For triathlons? Try the Dimension Tri. A premium perch at a more accessible price? Save up for a Dimension 143. A featherweight for fast riding? Enter the R2 Nack.

It's a big range, especially considering that I’ve missed the countless special editions and that many of the above saddles have counterparts that feature eye-catching zones of nano-structured 3D polymer padding. That’s CPC – Connected Power Control – in Prologo speak.

All of these saddles share a similar, but not identical, broad V-shaped outline that places them in direct competition with other short-nosed seats, such as variants of the Specialized Power, Selle Italia Novus and Fizik Argo, which are among the best saddles. If you’re looking for a more T-shaped short-nosed saddle, Prologo’s solution includes its Scratch and Nago lines.

Construction

For a flagship product, the Prologo Dimension R2 Nack looks suitably understated, if anything, perhaps a little too conservative. Other saddles in the Dimension line are embellished with loud graphics, splashed with colour or feature 3D-printed zones. There’s none of that here, just small, subtle logos on the nose, the stern and the right wing.

Its overall shape stays true to the aforementioned ‘V’, a product of its short nose and broad wings. Width is 143mm, which is wide but not ridiculously so, and the total length is 245mm, so it easily complies with the UCI’s 240mm minimum length rule. The nose is quite chunky at 40mm in width; at least a couple of millimetres wider than the entry-level Dimension 143 model.

The very end of the nose has a slight dip to it, but from here back to the midsection the Dimension R2’s profile is flatter than Florida. From the midsection, just forward of the wing tips, to the very rear of the saddle, there’s a consistently shallow 9° rise. All in all, the profile is pretty flat, with no curves or waves.

I measured the pressure relief channel to be 20mm at its widest point, which is half the width of the cutouts on some saddles I’ve reviewed recently. If it’s up to the job and you don’t like that ‘toilet seat’ look, this could be the saddle for you.

If you’re wondering about the relevance of the Nack suffix, it refers to the 7mm x 9.3mm oval rails, which are made from ‘Nano Carbon Fibre’, Prologo’s proprietary blend of carbon fibre, Kevlar and aluminium filaments. Prologo says Nack is extremely resilient, easily up to the rough and tumble of mountain biking and gravel.

The chassis, which catches the light with a subtle sheen, is made from injected Long Fibre Carbon, a material that’s stronger, stiffer and more resistant to impact than components made from short fibres.

In keeping with many other Prologo saddles, the padding and cover don’t enclose the entire saddle top, only the flanks, leaving the chassis exposed along the centre line. This makes perfect sense – there seems to be little point in padding and wrapping areas that never make contact with the rider.

To save weight, Prologo has developed an EVA padding that it says boasts the same comfort levels as the rest of the range, despite being 20% thinner. Certainly, it is very svelte, with the total thickness, including the cover, down to just a couple of millimetres at the saddle edge.

The cover is faux leather microfibre, which is exceedingly smooth to the touch. To help reduce the glide, Prologo has applied faint, narrow ‘Slide Control’ grip lines, which wave their way across the left wing and right nose area.

The carbon fibre construction and innovative use of padding have reduced the weight of the Dimension R2 to a claimed 135g (139g measured), which is ridiculously light. Apparently, that’s about the same weight as half a baguette but infinitely more comfortable and considerably more robust.

The ride

What sets the R2 apart from the other saddles in Prologo’s Dimension range is its impressively low weight and flat, comparatively wide nose. It’s so light it almost levitates.

These characteristics scream high performance. The weight reduction provides a small but obvious benefit, while the level chunky nose enables riders to tuck into an aero stance with both comfort and control.

However, Prologo doesn’t consider the R2 to be exclusively for tarmac, saying it’s a ‘multi-disciplinary saddle perfect for road and XC/Marathon use’.

Having spun some long miles with the R2 on a variety of bikes and surfaces, riding an assortment of tyre widths and pressures, I think that’s a fair assessment. It’s ideal for anything that calls for lightweight performance, whether that be on road, off-road or, of course, gravel.

Now, I’m a big fan of short-nosed saddles, probably because I’m fairly tall with long legs (84cm saddle to BB), so, by default, my saddle-bar drop is quite pronounced – the equivalent of a mildly slammed stem. A short-nosed saddle with a relief channel, such as the R2, enables me to rotate my pelvis without causing discomfort to the soft tissues of the perineal area. However, I readily accept that they’re not for everyone.

Saddles of this type don’t allow for much fore-aft movement, much to the frustration of riders who enjoy the freedom of fine-tuning their riding positions for ascents and descents. Additionally, riders who like to ‘steer through the hips’ can feel more secure using the grip and leverage a longer-nosed saddle provides.

In my experience, the R2’s flat, broad nose not only makes forward rotation more comfortable, but it also reintroduces some of that security. The potential downside, which I didn’t experience but others may, is the increased risk of chafing, exacerbated by the R2’s already wide V shape.

Which conveniently brings me on to the topic of comfort. Prologo only makes this saddle in a 143mm width, which it claims is a good generic compromise that will fit most people. If you need to go wider, consider the broader, but heavier, Dimension Space.

For me, the relatively narrow pressure relief channel worked its magic. I didn’t notice it providing any distinct advantage or disadvantage over the much wider channels found on saddles such as the Vento Argo from Fizik, except that it prevents as much soggy road muck from soaking your chamois. In theory, having a smaller cutout should enable the chassis to remain stiffer for better power transfer, while, in the real world, the stiffness/compliance dichotomy depends on myriad factors. Regardless, the R2’s long fibre carbon shell is noticeably stiff.

The slim-looking EVA padding was a pre-ride concern that made me wonder whether Prologo was foolishly sacrificing comfort in order to boast headline-grabbing weight-saving stats. However, there’s a good amount of depth over the sit-bone area - perhaps 8mm - and, despite being quite firm, the padding does exhibit a fair bit of cushion. Sensibly, Prologo has only reduced the padding where it’s not needed, so rides of up to four hours on this stiff saddle never felt unduly harsh, even towards the finish.

The primary advantage of the Nack rails is their contribution to saving weight, which they achieve admirably. Carbon fibre rails are also said to be stiffer, yet absorb more road vibration, qualities that are difficult to quantify. Much depends on where your saddle is clamped on the rails, and whether it is truly possible to perceive such minor suspension benefits over components that have a more significant influence, such as your tyre and pressure choices.

Value and conclusions

It’s no surprise that the Prologo Dimension R2 Nack saddle ticks so many boxes. After all, that’s the raison d'être of the Dimension line - it’s Prologo’s most versatile saddle range. The R2 is light, slight, comfortable and well up for keeping your posterior happy whatever your chosen discipline. Provided, of course, you get along with short-nosed saddles.

However, its hallmark feature – its impressive ability to defy gravity – must be weighed against its hefty price. At £209/$249, it is more than twice the price of the entry-level steel-railed Dimension 143, yet the weight saving is only 84g. To be fair, the R2 probably benefits from better quality padding, and its carbon rails and chassis may provide a better ride feel. Only you can decide whether these benefits add £100/$100 of value.

The R2 fares better when compared to outside competition. Fizik’s full carbon Vento Argo 00 shares a similar spec to the R2 and matches it gramme for gramme, but it is considerably more expensive at £269.99/$299.99. Specialized’s S-Works Power, which boasts a carbon shell and rails, costs £240/$324 and weighs 25g heavier than the R2.

However, these saddles from Fizik and Specialized are both available in a variety of widths, whereas unless you have generic-sized sit bones you may come unstuck with the R2. The alternative, the 153mm Dimension Space, weighs a substantial 100g more.

Specs

• Weight: 135g claimed, 139g measured
• Size: 245x143mm
• Rails: Nack (Nano Carbon Fiber) composed of carbon fiber, Kevlar and aluminium filaments
• Chassis: Long Fiber Carbon

Priced firmly in the premium bracket, they promise all-day comfort, top-tier materials, and subtle but useful features. I’ve tested them extensively across a range of UK conditions to see whether they’re actually worth the asking price, and whether they can compete with the best bib-shorts.

The short answer, these are a great set of bibs, offering comfort and practicality - that is, if you've got the cash.

MAAP Aeon bib shorts: construction

From the off, these feel like a proper bit of high-end kit - just what you would expect with MAAP. The fit is close - definitely a race cut - but not uncomfortably so. That said, if you’re between sizes, I’d recommend going up. I’m 6ft with a slim build and the size small was ever-so-slightly on the short side when it comes to short length.

The fabric choice is where MAAP really shines. The Aeon uses a textured, compressive material that feels soft, breathable, and incredibly well-made. It’s particularly good in warmer weather - on rides in the mid-20s and sun, I never felt clammy. On cooler days (around 12°C), they were just about fine, though I wouldn’t be reaching for them first thing on a chilly morning ride.

The most important component of any good bib short is the chamois, and MAAP impresses here too. Borrowed from MAAP’s Alt_Road range, it’s a high-density, 3D thermo-moulded pad that offers excellent support over long distances. No soreness, no bunching, and no signs of wear after multiple long rides. It’s on par with the best from Le Col and a definite step up from the Rapha Core Cargo bibs which I have previously tested, especially when you’re well into hour three or four in the saddle.

Seamless leg grippers are another highlight. Instead of a stitched band, the silicone is woven into the fabric, creating a secure fit without any pressure points or irritation. They stay put brilliantly without tugging at your legs, and they don’t leave marks - even if you’ve got hairy legs like me.

The rear pockets are more divisive. They’re relatively small with tight openings, which initially made me question their usefulness. But in practice, they work well for stashing items you don’t need to access on the move - like a rain cape or spare food. They’re secure and don’t bounce around, which definitely helps with comfort on longer rides. Just don’t expect to reach back mid-ride without a faff; realistically, you’ll want to stop to get into them.

But I actually think that is perfect for their purpose. These bibs are designed for long rides, and those pockets are to add a little bit of extra storage as a result. So it makes total sense to be able to stop, ditch the empty wrappers in your jersey pockets, and reload with more food, move a raincape around, whatever it may be.

MAAP Aeon bib shorts: the ride

Out riding, the Aeon bibs quickly prove their worth. They’re lightweight, move well with the body, and most importantly, they just disappear under you - which is exactly what good kit should do.

On warmer days, they’re spot on. The ventilation is excellent, and the material doesn’t hold onto moisture. Even on longer efforts, everything stays dry, supported, and comfortable. The pad remains impressively consistent, with no discomfort creeping in late in the ride.

Compared to bibs from Pas Normal which I have tested in the same price category, the Aeons feel noticeably more comfortable in terms of both fit and fabric. They might not have such accessible pockets as something like the Rapha Core Cargos, but they are certainly comfortable, and practical. Comfort-wise, they’re also right up there with Le Col’s top offerings - no mean feat, considering those are some of my all-time favourites.

In terms of versatility, they’re best suited to mild to warm conditions. In cool spring temperatures they’re just about fine, but if you ride early mornings or into autumn, you’ll probably want something a little more insulating.

MAAP Aeon bib shorts: value and conclusion

Now, the big question: are they worth £240?

It’s a lot of money for a pair of bib shorts, and there’s no avoiding the fact that if you are focusing purely on value, something like the Rapha Core bib shorts will yield more value for money. But for those who want something premium, both in looks and performance, these absolutely deliver.

They’re comfortable, beautifully made, and refined in all the right ways. The chamois is first class, the fit is dialled for performance without being punishing, and the detailing (like the leg grippers and minimal seams) is excellent.

But you are paying for the badge, too. MAAP has carved out a reputation as a high-end fashion-forward brand, and the Aeon range reinforces that image. For riders who want kit that looks and feels class, these will hit the mark.

There are lots of other bags in the Paramount range, including the similar-sounding Paramount Laptop BackPack 27L, with the key difference being the inclusion of a helmet-carrying pouch on the Commuter version.

Construction

There are two main compartments, both accessed via a U-shaped zip. The one closest to the wearer’s back has a zipped mesh pocket with two smaller open pockets within it and a fleece-lined laptop sleeve. The slot fits laptops up to 16”, according to Thule. The odd thing is that Thule’s website describes the sleeve as ‘floating’, which is what you would expect (this means the sleeve doesn’t extend to the bottom of the pack, keeping the device from impacting the floor when the bag is put down), however, it is not a floating sleeve. Both compartments are the full height of the bag.

Open up the second zip, and there is a more voluminous compartment with a single, shallow mesh pocket.

On the outside, there are two elasticated water bottle-style pockets on either side of the bag, along with a large, deep panel that can be opened out using the two zips. This is clearly meant for a bike helmet or D-lock, although it would also be good for stashing a bulky waterproof jacket, especially as there are a couple of drain holes at the bottom (next to a bike light loop). Above the stash panel, there is a strange magnetic flap that covers a small zipped pocket with a key clip and another mesh pocket. Thule suggests that a mobile phone can be stored in the small, fleecy pocket on the pack’s side.

The zip underneath the bag houses a reversible waterproof cover, with one highly reflective side.

The back panel is made up of stiff, mesh-covered, corrugated foam with a channel running down the spine, all of which are intended to help with breathability, whilst I eventually figured out that the strap across the pack can be used to attach it to the handle of wheeled luggage. The shoulder straps themselves are wide and well-padded with soft edging, and although there is a sternum strap, there is no hip belt, nor is there any facility to attach one.

The materials used look and feel impressively durable, and the rucksack as a whole is extremely substantial with all stitching neatly covered and a generally high-quality construction. The materials are waterproof and the zips are rubberised so will be pretty water-resistant. I weighed the bag at a not-insubstantial 1.5kg, close enough to Thule’s claimed weight of 1.43kg.

The ride

Working from home, I don’t have much need for a bag on my arduous journey to my study, but I did use the Paramount Commuter Rucksack on a rare train journey to London, some rides to the shops and various other outings that required a rucksack.

For a single-size rucksack, the Paramount Commuter is quite long. Some brands offer a couple of different back lengths, or if they are only available in one size, then the back length is a little bit shorter. At 186cm tall, the pack was just about OK for me, but it wouldn’t work very well for shorter men or women.

Furthermore, the shoulder straps are quite widely spaced and very stiff, so they sat far apart on my shoulders, even with the sternum strap tightened. Again, this would make the rucksack difficult and uncomfortable for smaller users. Maybe Thule based the fit on Swedish size statistics, which Google suggests is a couple of inches taller than UK averages.

As mentioned above, the rucksack has no waist belt, Thule says that it doesn’t need one, but I would disagree; I have spent many years climbing, skiing and riding with rucksacks of all shapes and sizes, and for all but the most casual use a hip belt is very useful to stabilise and load bear. Every time I rode with the Paramount Commuter, I missed the waist strap. It seems a very odd omission on such a comprehensively featured bag.

There was another issue when riding - the top of the bag hampered my over-the-shoulder view. Its boxy shape meant that the corners of the pack were in my eye line when I glanced back looking for cars. Perhaps with a waist strap, I could have worn the bag a bit lower and still felt that it was secure and stable.

The helmet/lock/waterproof jacket pouch worked fine with a secure fit, but the large flap over the top pocket seemed pretty pointless, especially given that the two tiny magnets which secure it in place were hard to locate and fiddly to use - I am not at all sure what this adds to the rucksack. Equally, I found the cosy phone pocket pretty hard to use and a bit pointless.

On the plus side, there are pockets, compartments and loops galore - the biggest problem would probably be remembering exactly where you had put your wallet or train ticket.

The inside of the bag is a classy deep maroon colour, with the large laptop compartment lined with a soft touch material. On that subject, although Thule says that it fits a 16” laptop, my 13” device slotted in sideways, so I’d imagine that it would happily accommodate the very largest laptop with ease. The two side pockets were equally voluminous, swallowing one litre water bottles without breaking a sweat.

Value and conclusion

On paper, the Paramount Commuter is well-featured, with all the pockets, compartments and zips you could wish for. There is also no doubt that it is very well-made and durable with a high-quality finish and construction, although it does strike me that 27 litres is quite a lot of cargo capacity for something intended for just travelling to work and back.

However, it is let down by shoulder straps that are too wide, the lack of a hip belt and its back length. As such, it is impossible to recommend it unequivocally. The straps and back length will, no doubt, suit some larger folk, but for me, the lack of a hip belt relegates it to very casual use only, at which point its cost becomes hard to justify. I’d much rather have one fewer pocket or zip and have a simple waist strap instead as this would add stability and fit options, especially when on a bike.

It is a hard product to rate because some elements, like its construction, are very good indeed, but other aspects are pretty poor, such as the fit. Given that it costs £150, I would really expect a lot better. It’s probably a 4 star product if it fits you but a 2 star if it doesn’t, thus I’ll settle on 50% - 2.5 stars.

The range covers pretty much all the spring, summer and autumn bases from arm warmers to bib tights, with the only exception being waterproof and windproof outerwear. I’ve tried several pieces from the Espresso collection, such as the Thermal Jersey, and so far, found them all to be excellent, with a running theme of a good fit, great performance and understated aesthetics. Sizing has been consistent and decidedly un-Italian, so my usual options of medium tops and large bottoms have been perfect.

There are currently 10 block colours in the range for men with sizes from XS to XXL and 8 for women with sizes from XS to XL. Minimal branding is a theme across all the Espresso products and this jersey just gets a small shoulder logo and another on the rear pockets.

Construction

The Espresso’s Air-O Stretch fabric is at the lighter end of jersey construction with plenty of stretch and breathability from tiny pores in the material, giving it a weight of around 100g depending on size. The same Air-O Stretch fabric is used throughout the garment.

The sleeves are, inevitably, raw cut for a modern look although there is no silicone for grip, and the collar is a nice, mid-height - not restrictive but not indecent either. Both the front zip and the rear security pocket zip are made by YKK, assuring quality and longevity whilst I particularly like the plasticised pull loop on the front zip that makes it easier to grab on the move. Additionally, there is a quarter-length placket behind the top of the zip, to make it simpler to operate when letting a bit of air in (and perhaps to stop chest hairs from getting caught?).

The bottom hem has an elasticated rear with a printed silicone gripper and at the front is a 3cm deep, stiffened elastic band which I think really helps the aesthetics of the jersey (and made a decent fist of containing my post-Christmas podge).

The ride

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I liked the Espresso Jersey as much as I’ve liked the rest of the Espresso range, which is to say, a lot. I think the colour palette is great, and with so many colours to choose from I’d imagine most riders could find something that they fancied, and the simple aesthetic of the range as a whole appeals to me.

For me, the fit is perfect. At 186cm/74kg the medium was snug without being at all restrictive in the riding position, helped no doubt by the very light, highly stretchy Air-O Stretch fabric. There was very little excess fabric anywhere and it was simply easy to forget about the jersey and concentrate on riding (unlike the experience I had with the Madison Flux Men's Short Sleeve Jersey). Castelli makes some vague aero claims for the jersey, which I certainly can’t verify, but a close-fitting, unrestrictive jersey that doesn’t have any excess flapping material certainly feels faster and better than looser alternatives.

The pockets were set at the right height for easy access without drooping down over my bum when stuffed full and I’m always pleased to see a zipped security pocket having once left some house keys somewhere along a route when furkling in my pockets for snacks.

Fabric-wise, the Air-O Stretch did its job very well. Although the mid-teens temperatures in Spain didn’t trouble it much in terms of breathability, I also used the Espresso Jersey on the turbo trainer a few times - a much sterner test of moisture management. I was very impressed at how dry it was after a session in Watopia. Castelli gives the jersey a suggested temperature range of 18° to 35° which I’d agree with, perhaps making it a jersey for the warmer British summer days or one to pair with a gilet and arm warmers for cooler rides.

Value and Conclusion

I’d say that the whole Espresso range is pitched at the sensible end of premium price-wise. £125 for a jersey is certainly no bargain, but it is possible to pay far more for a jersey as well as considerably less.

A phrase I’ve used before in relation to Espresso products is ‘doing the basics well’, and this applies here too. A full-zip, 3-pocket jersey with raw-cut sleeves is certainly not ground-breaking or innovative on paper, but it's all about the execution. For me, the combination of fit and fabric makes the Espresso jersey brilliant to wear and ride in. Add in the multiple colour choices and the potential to mix and match with other items from the range and I think that Castelli deserves a pat on the back for the Espresso Jersey.

This latest partnership, we're told, was born in the streets and far flung fields of Amsterdam, a place where MAAP says, movement and creative expression flow freely. Amsterdam is home to both Pop Trading Company and MAAP’s first European LaB retail store.

The result, Maap tells us, is “a collection for the moments of exploration with friends, and the fleeting encounters that take root. A cross-pollination of ​ the two brands’ signature aesthetics with a subtle nod to the city that connects them through a floral-inspired colour palette.”

It's fair to say, me and many of my colleagues wear the somewhat derogatory 'cool dad' tag with pride, so absolutely love bike-skate tie-ups, but we have no idea what all that means, except this is fashun, so perhaps we’re not supposed to.

What I do know is that crossover collections sell, and beyond the naked commoditisation of our noble sport, they bring more eyes to it. With so-called entry-level road race bikes now out of reach of most youngsters until they get their first job at the Hedge Fund Uncle Edward runs, and with limited opportunities to watch the WorldTour on telly now, these collabs keep it fresh and bring the cool kids in.

Despite typically premium prices which deliberately keep these kinds of capsules exclusive, they do know how to make it all look achingly cool and aspirational, and this new capsule from MAAP is no exception.

Unlike recent collabs however – the brilliant Rapha Palace tie-ups of recent years spring to mind – this one has it’s core target cycling market at it's heart, and manages to hit the cool notes without dressing you up like a 90's billboard, so I’d expect to see a few of these fresh items among the assembly of google-folk, riding out of King’s Cross and into London's Richmond Park this weekend.

Practically, this is all pretty good gear, although I should say I have no experience of the off-bike clobber, I've been using MAAP socks for months, and I really like them. The sock design in this collection, like many of the items actually, stand-alone reasonably well and will likely team up with tons of your existing gear too.

The capsule includes both cycling apparel, off-bike clothing, skate decks and a range of accessories.

Cycling style is taken care of with MAAP’s recently launched Pro Air Jersey 3.0 which we reviewed recently, the Team Long Sleeve Jersey, Atmos Jacket and Team Bib Evo, all of which feature limited edition colours and MAAP & POP graphics.

The collection of off-bike apparel includes a Graphic Tee, a Hooded Sweat, cosy Mohair Knit Sweaters and Cardigans, lightweight technical pants, and a technical Oracle waterproof jacket.

Shop the MAAP & POP collection at MAAP.cc or Pop Trading Company, and in LaB retail stores and select retailers.

The collection will be launched through in-store events and community rides at MAAP LaB stores on the 7th, 9th and 10th of May.

The Fray is ENVE’s all-road bike, sitting between the MOG gravel bike and the Melee road machine. All three bikes are only available in the UK as a ‘chassis’, which includes the stem, bars and seatpost (all from ENVE, naturally); however, in the US, you can buy just the frameset without the other components. Currently, the UK gets three colours as opposed to the seven available over the pond, although this may well change. Clearly, with so many colour options, the Fray has been a success for ENVE, which has used its extensive carbon know-how well in its succinct range of frames.

The thing is, though, that the Melee, ENVE’s most road-orientated bike, already has 35mm tyre clearance and mudguard mounts - so where does that put the Fray?

The Fray finds its niche by offering a slightly more relaxed riding position, with a higher stack and shorter reach, along with a gravel-compatible tyre clearance of 40mm and the all-important modern accessory that no self-respecting bike should be without these days, it seems: down tube storage.

A sort of 'all-road plus' bike perhaps.

Construction

Silhouette-wise, the Fray is pretty standard-looking. The carbon frame has dropped seatstays and a sloping top tube with very little in the way of overtly aerodynamic features apart from a few D-shaped tubes. The graphics are subtle, with one nice touch being the inclusion of the frame size, reach and stack figures in small writing near the bottom bracket.

As well as the bottle cage mounts and hidden mudguard attachment points, there are also bosses under the down tube and on the top tube for extra carrying capacity. On that subject, the down tube storage is reasonably well executed, with two zipped neoprene sleeves included, in which a tube and tools can be carried.

The frame’s numbers are, unsurprisingly, not a million miles away from other rapid all-road bikes such as the Pinarello Dogma X and Cervelo Caledonia-5, with the 56cm test bike having a reach of 389mm and a stack of 591mm. The 172mm head tube might seem a bit on the long side, but the design allows for a very low stem, so in practice it isn’t as long as the numbers suggest. Elsewhere, the wheelbase is 1008mm and the chainstays are the regulation all-road 415mm long. Seat tube and head tube are 73.5° and 72.6° respectively - a touch slacker than the Caledonia-5 and Dogma X.

Frame weight is given as 950g, which is pretty good considering it has the ‘Cargo Bay’ in the down tube, and only a couple of hundred grams more than most pedigree race bikes. Indeed, I weighed the whole bike at 8.04kg (without pedals), which, given the 36mm tyres fitted at the time, is very decent.

A good chunk of the UK chassis price is made up by the fact that the stem and bars retail for over £800 together, and although both are beautifully made, that is a lot of cash. At least they can be separately selected for optimum fit, unlike many one-piece systems. The inline carbon seatpost is also a premium-priced item if bought independently, with a D-shape for aerodynamics.

The final ENVE component is the carbon SES 3.4 wheelset, which uses a 39mm deep front rim and a 43mm deep rear. As standard, these come with ENVE hubs and cost £3,350 with a claimed weight of 1,390g, but our wheels had Chris King hubs, pushing the price of them well over £3,500. These rims are notable for their very wide internal width of 25mm.

Initially, the bike was fitted with 36mm WTB Exposure tyres, which should be a good all-round option for mixed surfaces; however, as the rim’s width caused the tyres to measure up at a whopping 39mm, we decided to fit the smaller 30mm version. Even so, these still came up at 33mm when inflated.

Much has been written about Shimano’s 12-speed Ultegra Di2, the tl:dr of which is that it is every bit as good as Dura-Ace, just 300g or so heavier. There is no need to dwell on this area, save to mention that the Fray frame is compatible with both 1x and 2x drivetrains and that our bike had a road-biased 52/36 chainset and 11-30t cassette fitted.

The ride

As you might imagine, the (effectively) 39mm WTB Exposure tyres kind of dominated the first few rides. With that much rubber and such a large volume of air, the bike certainly felt super comfortable, shrugging off small imperfections and large cracks in the road surface with impunity. Even off-road, the bike managed perfectly well on smoother, flatter trails of the Peak District, but it was hard to get much of an impression of the frame’s characteristics.

Before a week’s riding in Spain, I switched the tyres for some 30mm ones, albeit still the endurance-orientated Exposure model. These were great for long, steady rides around Denia, taking in the local highlights such as Coll de Rates and Val d’Ebo. I never felt that the bike or tyres lacked pace, and my Strava times up these hills broadly matched my previous efforts (if not those of Tadej Pogacar…). It was great not to worry about the odd unsurfaced section or gravelly back road, thanks to the tyres and the bike’s relatively forgiving nature.

Once back in the UK, I was keen to try the bike with a quicker tyre to help me in the competitive crucible of the Sunday club run through the Peak District, so I swapped to a pair of Scribe’s impressive Core 50 SL+ wheels, which had 28mm Hutchinson Blackbird tyres fitted. This turbo-charged the ride thanks to the lighter, faster rubber, and actually didn’t reduce compliance as much as I’d anticipated. The narrower Blackbirds have more supple sidewalls than the Exposures despite less volume, and also allowed the Fray’s carbon layup to absorb more of the buzz, knocking the edge off the vibrations whilst giving the bike a much livelier feel.

You certainly shouldn’t think that the Fray is a soft, slouchy kind of ride, though. I’d say it is slightly more direct/less compliant than the Cervelo Caledonia-5 and much more responsive than the Ribble Allroad Ti, for example. 80-100km rides were dispatched without bother, and I have no doubt that the bigger the ride, the more the Fray’s long-legged character would come to the fore. The front end just about went low enough for me to feel racey whilst the wheelbase was still short enough to feel rewarding without ever crossing over into race-bike twitchiness, and I liked the centred position afforded by the inline post and slightly lengthened chainstays.

There were some things I was less keen on, though. The Cargo Bay rattled when empty, a trait which I think is a bit unforgivable at this price point, and as the test ENVE MOG also suffered from this, it clearly isn’t a one-off. I also couldn’t make the storage work for me - it didn’t fit my usual set of tools and spares, so I simply stuffed a windproof jacket into it to keep my pockets emptier and the rattle silenced.

I also didn’t get on with the flare of the expensive SES AR Road In-Route Handlebar and found it awkward, and although the width on the tops was welcome, the lack of round 31.8mm bar for lights etc, made life a bit difficult. The In-Route stem, however, was a thing of beauty, and it was great to have been able to spec a long enough unit for me to feel comfortable rather than being saddled with the manufacturer’s spec.

Value and conclusion

My overall impression of the Fray was one of utter competence. This might seem like an odd word to use, but bear with me. It is quick, direct and reasonably comfortable, depending on tyre size, of course, and performs admirably on both good and bad road surfaces. Put skinny knobbly tyres on it and explore lanes, trails and tracks without worrying about the surface or stick some lightweight tyres on and travel very nearly as fast as a race bike. Load it up for bike packing trips or fasten on some mudguards and enjoy riding it year-round. It will happily do most things that you are likely to ask of it.

It is a great bike (Cargo Bay rattle excepted), and one I would gladly spend many miles on, but it is an awful lot of money for a generalist machine. It would be possible to knock a few quid off by speccing more prosaic wheels, but with a chassis price of £5,500, opportunities for saving money are limited.

There is little doubt that ENVE has nailed the brief and produced a consummate all-road, all-rounder type bike. What I struggle with, however, is its place in the market. For the £12,000 retail price of the test bike, I’d imagine most potential buyers would be better off with £7,000 road bike (still equipped with Ultegra Di2) and a £5,000 gravel bike, or even a road bike, gravel bike and an all-road bike, splitting the budget however you like.

I am giving it 4.5 stars because it is perhaps the ultimate iteration of a versatile all-road bike and that is exactly what it sets out to be, but, personally, I would struggle to spend that kind of money on a bike that doesn’t have a purer purpose.

Madison uses its Roam category for such products, covering all bases from waterproof jackets to socks, with an emphasis on comfort and versatility, albeit from a cycling point of view. The Roam Men’s Short Sleeve Jersey adds a Roam twist to the staple cycling jersey.

Construction

The fabric used for the Roam jersey is a little heavier than you’d expect, with dense, stretchy material that is almost Lycra-esque. Down the spine is a black mesh panel to improve breathability, although this seems slightly at odds with the main fabric’s feel.

Along with the three standard rear pockets, there is a large zipped pocket on the left hip and a fifth, open mesh pocket on the right hip. This mesh pocket actually extends inward over the rear pocket to give lots of space for stashing larger items such as a windproof jacket.

The full-length locking zip is tonal and includes a guard at the top to prevent irritation, whilst the collar itself is of a reasonable height. The sleeves are hemmed rather than raw-cut, although they are of a decent, modern length, and all the stitching looks to be neat and accurate.

An elasticated hem with silicone grippers runs along the rear of the jersey, although there is no elastication at the front, just a bonded hem, so it should sit flat across the stomach. A small reflective patch on the central pocket and reflective branding on the left sleeve are the only nods to visibility.

It is available in Lake Blue, Moss Green and Mineral Red with sizes from S to XXL for men, whilst women’s sizes run from UK8 to UK 16 in Lake Blue or Moss Green.

The ride

The fit of the Roam is a touch more relaxed than the racier Madison Flux Men’s Short Sleeve Jersey, with the sleeves of the Roam slightly baggy on my admittedly skinny arms. The size medium, much like the Flux, is probably a bit more generous than brands like Castelli, Assos or Rapha, although I still don’t think that I could have squeezed into a size small.

The material used by Madison is very nice against the skin and has lots of easy stretch so that the jersey moves with you and doesn’t feel at all restrictive. Moisture management has seemed to be reasonable, although temperatures in the UK so far this year have not provided it with too much of a challenge, and the extra-breathable mesh panel has felt somewhat redundant.

Unfortunately, I had similar fit issues on the bike to those I experienced with the Madison Flux Short Sleeve Jersey. When in a riding position, the fabric over the shoulders rucks up and flaps about whilst the rear hem isn’t under enough tension for the elastic or silicone to do their jobs effectively. There also seems to be too much fabric across the chest. The hem issue may be a sizing thing, although I don’t believe so, but the excess material over the shoulders and chest, I’m sure, has to do with the cut. It is as if the jersey was designed for standing upright rather than bent-forward riding a bike.

Admittedly, it is slightly less of an issue for the more relaxed Roam than it was for the racier Flux, but nonetheless, it does seem odd. Of course, it may be that I am simply not a ‘Madison’ shape, but as I have not had this issue with Assos, Castelli, Rapha, etc, I don’t think that is the case.

It is a shame because the fabric and features are pretty decent, and the jersey is very versatile - as at home on gravel as it is on a big road ride.

Value and conclusion

These days, £60 is not bad for a quality short-sleeve jersey, so the Roam looks initially to be good value. However, I’m not sure where the extra 20 quid over the Flux has gone; I don’t know that a couple of extra pockets and a mesh panel should cost that.

The cut isn’t ideal either, although if you prefer your jerseys a little looser, then I doubt that the areas of seemingly excess fabric would bother you too much, and it isn’t supposed to be a race-fit jersey anyway.

If the Roam jersey fits you, then the five-pocket layout and nice fabric make it worth a look, but also consider the cheaper three-pocket Madison Flux.

If nothing else, Castelli must take the record for the most number of colours available in a pair of bib shorts. There are no fewer than eleven colours for men listed on Castelli's website and six for women, so whatever colour your jersey, bike, shoes or helmet there should be the perfect colour available (although Clay would be a brave choice for shorts!).

Sizes for men run from XS to 3XL and from XS to XL for women (the women’s version gets a drop tail function for easier toilet visits).

Construction

It used to be that the measure of the best cycling shorts was the number of panels it had, with panels equalling better fit. Modern fabrics have made this concept redundant, and the Espresso Bibshort only have two vertical seams on the legs for a minimalist look.

The Espresso Doppio fabric feels slightly heavier weight than something like Castelli’s Free Aero Race shorts, with a matte finish and almost a stretch-woven feel to them which promises decent durability. The hems are raw-cut with well-spaced vertical silicone grippers, a smaller-than-usual Castelli Scorpion on the left one and small reflective tabs. Lightweight mesh straps, with the brand’s name spelt out in the perforations, suggest that breathability won’t be an issue.

At the base of the straps on the rear of the shorts is an open, stretchy pocket that measures 12cm x 12cm. This sits underneath/behind any jersey pockets.

If a pair of bib shorts is the most important piece of cycling gear, then the seat pad is the most important element of the shorts. Made to absorb vibrations and cosset your derriere for hours on end the pad must also keep your skin dry and chafe-free whilst perched on a sliver of leather and carbon. Castelli’s Progetto X2 Air has been around for some time now, and is used in all of their premium shorts and tights. It is made up of a seamless, bacteriostatic skin care layer with good airflow and a multi-density, variable-thickness foam layer with viscous padding. In practice, this means that the outer edges of the pad are much thinner than the middle sections, with three labelled areas under the sit bones and perineum using even firmer foam - the Viscous Comfort Zones apparently.

The ride

First, and by far the most important aspect of any shorts that I try, is the tan line test; the Espresso Bibshort passed with flying colours. That is to say, their hem lined up with other shorts that I wear from Castelli, Universal Colours and Assos so that any tan lines remain sharp and unsmudged. The fairly sparse but effective vertical silicone leg grippers also kept the hems firmly in place so they didn’t ride up as the day progressed without irritation.

The Espresso Doppio fabric looked and felt great - slightly compressive and a touch more substantial than some Lycra with a nice, non-shiny finish. The material is maybe slightly mismatched if paired with Castelli’s lightweight Espresso Jersey, with the very airy jersey fabric seemingly made for warmer temperatures than the shorts.

Sizing was on par with other brands too - large fitted me at 176cm/74kg and although the shorts felt snug, once on and in the right place there was no hint of restriction. Likewise, the light mesh straps were long enough to allow me to stand up straight without them pulling me forward.

While Castelli’s venerable Progetto X2 Air seat pad is not quite my absolute favourite pad, it is great for a day or two (in different shorts!) or up to six hours on a ride. However, after that, I do start to feel a bit of slight discomfort around the edges of the pad where it is thinner. Of course, pad fit and comfort are purely personal and as Castelli uses the Progetto X2 Air in all their top-end shorts and tights the feedback must be very positive overall.

On shorter rides, the pad is very comfortable with good moisture management and a pleasant feel against the skin, although I can’t claim that my nether regions are delicate enough to tell the difference between the 15mm padding and the 9mm sections!

I know from long-term ownership of other products with the Progetto X2 Air seat pad that multiple cycles through the washing machine do nothing to reduce the pad’s effectiveness.

I never really found a use for the rear pocket - it’s reasonably deep but open, so I wouldn’t put anything valuable in it and as it sits against the small of the back whatever is in there is likely to get pretty damp and sweaty. I guess something like arm warmers discarded after a cool start would be OK, or a couple of gels, although anything in there is going to bulk out the jersey pocket above it. Maybe if you were riding in a non-pocketed jersey then it might be handy.

Value and conclusion

Castelli in general, and the Espresso collection specifically, tends to hit a sweet spot where you know you are paying a bit of a premium for quality materials and thoughtful design, but you can see (and feel) where the cash has gone. This is certainly the case with the Espresso Bibshort with its classy aesthetic and refined materials.

£175 / $180 is a chunk of money, but it is at the low to mid-end of premium brand shorts, with Assos for example, topping out at £305 / $400 and PNS bib shorts not even starting until £210 / $240. For something so crucial to on-bike comfort it is well worth paying to keep your bum happy.

Design and construction

Posedla’s Joyseat 2.0 padding is made of variable-density TPU, which is then glued to a carbon shell and rails. Fabrication is done in Varnsdorf, North Bohemia in the Czech Republic, close to the German border. The saddle is printed using “MultiJet Fusion technology,” which is a form of 3D printing in which the raw material starts in powder form. Slowly, the printer builds up the lattice-work structure that becomes the saddle top, after which (in Posedla’s words) it “undergoes a series of post-processing steps. This includes thorough cleaning, sandblasting, and powder removal. A vapour smoothing treatment is then applied to improve surface finish and ensure the final product meets both performance and aesthetic standards.”

Because the top and base are manufactured separately, Posedla has the ability to replace this top portion if it wears out, reusing the carbon rails and shell. This also makes crash replacement a feasible option, should the need arise. The final product ships in elegantly designed recycled cardboard packaging, and arrives with a data sheet of all of the customer’s inputs and preferences.

Specs

• Dimensions: 156.5 mm wide x 251 mm long, as tested. (Posedla can manufacture saddles from 130–170 mm, depending on sit bone width.)
• Weight: 175 grams, as tested
• Rails: Carbon, 7 x 9 mm
• Price: $490/£390
• Rider weight limit: 100 kg

The Ride

If you ask anyone I ride with regularly, they’ll tell you that I’m exceedingly fastidious about bike fit. If anything feels remotely off, I will stop and fix it. I think this makes me a good product tester—I tend to notice subtle differences in ride characteristics—though it does make me a bit of a pain to ride with. Anytime I swap something out for testing, be it a crankset, handlebar or saddle, it takes me a few rides to get it dialled in.

I was expecting the same with Posedla’s Joyseat. Since its dimensions differ slightly from the saddle I typically use—my go-to is Ergon’s SR series—I had to make an estimate for the fore-aft location and saddle angle. But from the first ride, I got along harmoniously with it, almost—stay with me here—as if it were made for me.

Before I delve into ride impressions, however, I would like to provide a more detailed explanation of the preceding process. The unusually-named “Smiling Butt Kit” arrived at my door a few days after I placed my order. The kit contains a special type of imprintable foam in a box, along with very specific instructions for how to sit on it (tip: wear underwear). Once the imprint is complete, the final step is to photograph the kit from specific angles and upload these photos to Posedla’s website.

Around the perimeter of the imprint box are a series of QR code-style patterns that Posedla uses to process the images using photogrammetry techniques. According to Jiri Duzar, Posedla’s co-founder, “Our proprietary algorithm is the core of our customisation process. We use multiple-angle imaging to reconstruct a 3D model of the rider’s sit bones. The images are analysed using specific markers, which help determine precise dimensions and distances.”

From this process, Posedla is then able to create a personalised saddle, both in terms of foam density and placement, as well as shell width and shape. My saddle arrived with an info sheet detailing width, stiffness, padding, and curvature and showing where my sit bones should rest to be properly supported.

I tested the Joyseat over the course of roughly two months and several hundred kilometres. It’s grippier than a normal saddle, though the surface of the saddle is smoother and more uniform than other 3D printed saddles I’ve tested. My saddle is quite firm, though this is likely based on my inputs and not necessarily reflective of all of the saddles Posedla manufacturers.

As mentioned before, I got along well with the saddle from the get-go. I assumed I’d need to be very precise with the setup to be comfortable on it, but I found it worked well even as I adjusted my saddle placement. I was extremely impressed with the sit bone support. This firm platform allowed me to put out power efficiently, and I had multiple people comment on the fact that I looked especially smooth on the bike during the testing period.

Put simply, the design works really well for me to produce power. Often during testing, I was surprised by the numbers on my power meter. On short rides, I felt great. On longer rides (over 2.5 hours), however, I started to notice the saddle’s firmness and coarse texture through my chamois, which never caused issues, but wasn’t entirely comfortable either.

My interpretation of this situation is that the saddle design encourages you to stay in one place, and I prefer to move around. For those who like to slide a bit in the saddle, or change angles in undulating terrain, the saddle might have too narrow of a sweet spot to be comfortable on longer rides. It works best for someone who likes to lock in on a single spot and stay there. I think I could get used to this over time, but it’s different from what I’m accustomed to with more traditional saddle construction.

Also worth noting is that it is impossible to test a Posedla saddle before purchasing one, although this is true of all custom items. When I asked Duzar about this, he said, “Most riders find that their custom-fitted saddle significantly improves their comfort compared to off-the-shelf models. We offer a 60-day return guarantee, so riders can purchase in confidence knowing that we'll look after them if they find something in the final product that doesn't match their expectations.”

The Joyseat isn’t cheap, so this should offer some peace of mind if you’re on the fence about ordering.

Value and Conclusion

There’s no getting around the fact that Posedla’s Joyseat 2.0 is expensive. However, it’s priced within the range of other top-end saddles, like Specialized’s S-Works Power with Mirror ($449/£350) or Selle Italia’s SLR Boost 3D Kit Carbonio Superflow ($479). While these three examples also use 3D printed tops, they aren’t custom-made for the rider. Fizik is the only other major brand to offer custom saddles, through its One to One program, with similar options priced at $599/£450. The Joyseat 2.0, in comparison, looks quite reasonable at $490/£390.

For a newer company, Posedla is making an impressively well-designed, high-quality product. I also found the fitting and design process, which is complex, to be straightforward and easy to understand. I’ve tested a lot of saddles over the years, and rarely had one make such a good first impression. 3D saddles are still relatively new products, and I think there’s more room to refine them across the board, but the Joyseat 2.0 rivals the best options on the market. If you’re having trouble finding a saddle that works for you, Posedla’s custom process might be worth a try.

The Light Speed React kit is the latest edition to 2XU’s triathlon suit line, which includes other models such as the Core and Aero Hex kits. It was developed over 18 months and claims a 17-watt improvement from their 2024 Light Speed sleeved tri suit.

Honestly, 2XU is not all that widely available here in the U.S. Still, when I heard about its 18-month development period, claimed performance improvements and their slightly different approach to the WYN Republic Cda I also recently tested, I had to give it a shot.

Construction

The Light Speed React suit was released in February 2025 after a year and a half of wind tunnel testing, research, and development. As noted before, 2XU is first and foremost a compression apparel brand. Unlike other triathlon apparel companies, 2XU placed great emphasis on achieving an elite tri kit that was not only aerodynamic and had cooling properties but also offered superior muscle compression.

The kit is a classic polyester, spandex, and nylon blend, but one neat thing about the Light Speed React is that the shorts are made from 65% recycled nylon. Yes, this is a drop in the ocean, but it's good to see brands using more recycled textiles whenever possible and should be commended when they do.

Notably, the Light Speed React fabric includes HeiQ Smart Temp technology, which claims to be able to “sense” a rise in body temperature and “respond” by increasing sweat evaporation through the fabric for optimised cooling.

According to 2xu, the HeiQ Smart Temp technology kept athletes up to 4.5°f cooler than in non-HeiQ fabrics.

I'd like to briefly mention the colours of this kit, as they are quite stunning. The deep purple shorts and an ombre sherbet-colored top are a nice departure from the typical white, black, and navy blues seen in many triathlon kits.

• Flat overlock seam finishes
• 2XU’s PWX fabric delivers over twice the muscle support of competitor suits
• HeiQ Smart Temp technology in the fabric of the kit
• SBR silicone ridges across arms and shoulders to reduce drag
• SBR “skin lite” 160gsm stretch interlock wicks sweat away from upper body
• Large centre back aero pocket with dual side access as well as internal nutrition pockets
• Ice pocket on back neck for improve endurance performance in heat
• Full length semi-auto lock zipper
• TMF Light Speed Tri Chamois dual layer 90 density high impact / 140 density superlight foam and no foam at the external edge of the pad, allowing for flat stitching

The Ride

As was true with the WYN Republic CdA kit I tested, Colorado is still too cold in March to accurately test a kit with cooling properties outside, so I took to the trainer to test the Light Speed React on a two-hour ride (no fan was used).

I put on the kit in preparation for the ride and was immediately surprised at how short the torso portion is. It fit my shoulders, biceps, and back well, but the torso almost seemed intentionally designed to pull upwards at the bottom of the zipper, as confirmed by their marketing images.

I wasn’t a big fan of this. I kept wanting to tug the torso downwards out of habit, but there was not enough fabric for it to go any farther down. This didn’t end up bothering me as I rode, but stylistically, it looked and felt a bit awkward; I couldn’t help but think that over the course of the marathon portion of an Ironman, this could be an annoying style choice, as kits tend to ride up your torso as you run.

I initially thought, “This kit was not made for tall people, like myself.”

As I began my ride, I was pleased with how flexible the back and shoulders of the kit were while tucked in my aero bars. However, I was less pleased with how quickly the shorts of the kit bunched up in the front and inside of my groin.

I had the same gripe with the WYN Republic CdA kit: I am tall and have extremely broad shoulders, so I need a size large for my back and shoulder width, but my hips and legs best fit a medium. This leaves me with the choice of wearing a medium and feeling restricted, or wearing a large and contending with extra fabric usually around the groin.

The Light Speed React kit’s shorts bunched up far more than the CdA kit’s did, to the point where I had to stop pedalling a few times to tug the shorts back down into place. By the end of the ride, I had developed two hotspots where my inner thighs met my groin from the inner thigh seam.

If I had selected a size medium or the large fitted better around my legs, I'd likely not face this problem. Given that “wide shoulders and leaner legs” is a fairly common body type in triathlon, I felt it was of note and a bit of a miss by 2XU. Additionally, according to the size chart, I should have firmly been a large in both the top and bottom, which is doubly frustrating.

The kit did live up to its promise of keeping me cool and dry, and I was impressed by how fast the entire kit wicked away sweat. For a ride that definitely had me sweating, the Light Speed React kit wasn’t sopping wet by the end, and my core temperature felt well-regulated.

Value and Conclusion

The Light Speed React kit costs $350 USD, which I think is a fair price for what is marketed as an elite triathlon kit.

I appreciated the attention to detail in the kit's aesthetics, including multiple pockets for nutrition and ice storage. This is all before you even get to how well the fabric performs or how well it reduces drag.

I wish I’d gotten to experience a bit more of the muscle compression that 2xu touts, but some of that is my own unique challenge with finding a tri kit that fits my wide shoulders and narrow hips and legs. However, the torso and leg fabric felt well-made and durable, as did the chamois.

Shelling out $350 USD for some spandex and nylon panels stitched together is still quite the purchase. It's considerably less than the WYN, of course, but still firmly at the enthusiasts' end of the market. Given the fit sizing issues with the Light Speed React, I'd be inclined to look at 2XU's other less advanced offerings in the $100—and $200 range for the savings.

In all, the Light Speed React is a well-designed kit with a few awkward aspects—the short torso and the hotspots in the groin—but if it fits your body well, it is a solid temperature-regulating kit with a lot of research and development behind it.

Times change, though, and the gravel market has moved quickly over the last couple of years, so it's no surprise that there's an updated version on its way. Despite this, Argon18 has stuck to its original formula of a more rounded bike designed for long-distance riding and racing. With its range of mounting options, it should also make a great bikepacking bike.

Longer, slacker, lower

Those of you who ride mountain bikes will be all too familiar with the words, longer, slacker and lower when it comes to geometry, but it is still not as widespread in the gravel world as it probably should be. The latest Dark Matter follows this trend, featuring a longer reach and wheelbase, as well as a 1-degree slacker head angle. This should give it a more planted feeling and make it easier to handle over rough sections and technical descents, which not only enhances trail speed but can also help reduce fatigue on long rides.

It's also bang on trend for wider tyres, taking up to 57mm wide rubber, with 50mm versions fitted as standard specification.

Argon18 says it's improved the aerodynamics. Thanks to enhancements in its lay-up and dropped seatstays, it says that comfort levels have increased too, while also reducing the frame weight by 150g.

There's now frame storage in the downtube, which is ideal for those who prefer a clean-looking bike free from bags, for day-to-day riding.

While there is no mention of suspension compatibility in the marketing information, the Argon18 rider Chris Hall has posted some pictures on his instagram feed of his Dark Matter sporting the latest fork from Fox. Hall is racing the bike in the Traka event in Girona that features some pretty technical (for gravel at least) trails and gives an idea of just how capable a bike it could be for those looking to blur the lines between XC mtb and gravel.

Availability and pricing

The Argon 18 Dark Matter will be available in three specifications, with prices ranging from £3,500 to £6,500.

The GRX version will be the first one to hit shop floors, with the two SRAM variants due to follow later. All are built around a 1x groupset, which I'm happy to see, as my main criticism of the original bike was its old-school feeling and tyre width limiting 2x set-up.

That said, if you're still a double chainset fan, the frame will take it, but as yet, there's no word on frame-only options.

At launch the bike is offered in three builds:

Dark Matter SRAM Force XPLR AXS

• Frame/fork: Dark Matter carbon
• Groupset: SRAM Force XPLR AXS Wide 40t, 10-44t
• Wheelset: Zipp 303 XPLR S
• Tyres: Schwalbe G-One RX Pro TLR 50mm
• Bars: FSA A-Wing Pro AGX
• Stem: FSA SMR-II
• Saddle: Repente Quasar 2.0
• Seatpost: Argon 18 TDS-C carbon
• Price: £6,500 / $6,650 / €7,395

Dark Matter SRAM Rival AXS

• Frame/fork: Dark Matter carbon
• Groupset: SRAM Rival XPLR AXS Wide 40t, 10-44t
• Wheelset: DT Swiss G1800 alloy
• Tyres: Schwalbe G-One RX Pro TLR 50mm
• Bars: FSA A-Wing Pro AGX
• Stem: FSA SMR-II
• Saddle: Repente Quasar 2.0
• Seatpost: Argon 18 TDS-C carbon
• Price: £4,500 / $4,650 / €5,095

Dark Matter Shimano GRX

• Frame/fork: Dark Matter carbon
• Groupset: Shimano GRX RX822/610 40t, 10-51t
• Wheelset: DT Swiss G1800 alloy
• Tyres: Vittoria Terreno T50 Mixed 50mm
• Bars: FSA A-Wing Pro AGX
• Stem: FSA SMR-II
• Saddle: Repente Quasar S 2.0
• Seatpost: Argon 18 TDS-C carbon
• Price: £3,500 / $3,650 / €3,995

The two protagonists are the Italian shoe brand Sidi, which brings artisanal expertise and desirable racing heritage to the coffee table, and the Como-based bike shop, café, and clothing brand Sartoria Ciclistica, poised to inject a double shot of espresso-fuelled sartorial elegance.

The Laghèe Sprinter, with its clean, sneaker-esque lines and multi-hued tongue, does look undeniably cool. But is it desirable, or even feasible, to produce a super-stiff sole married to a slipper-like upper?

Construction

Let’s start by deconstructing the name. ‘Sprinter’ is self-explanatory but think playful town sign sprint rather than Cav going full-gas at Saint-Vulbas. ‘Laghèe’ translates as ‘of the Lake’, a reference to Como’s locals and the affectionate term Sartoria Ciclistica uses to address its devotees.

Working from the bottom up, the Laghèe Sprinter has a ‘C-boost aerolite’ carbon sole with a stiffness rating of 12/12 on Sidi’s rigidity scale. It’s the same sole as found on Sidi’s top-tier Shot 2 race shoe. I take size 48 shoes, which tend to exhibit more flex than shorter lengths, but trust me, there’s absolutely no give in this sole when I try to flex it in any direction by hand.

Embedded into the sole at the toe and heel are two replaceable silver/grey nylon inserts, each attached with a single crosshead screw. Both feature tiny raised black nylon tread blocks and house small vents – one at the front, three at the rear – that are protected from small pebbles and other road detritus by fine stainless-steel mesh.

Most of the sole, with its slick carbon weave boldly visible, is silky smooth to the touch, except for the area around the adjustable cleat holes, which is roughly textured for grip. The three bolt holes have 6mm of fore and aft adjustment, and there are guide rules etched into the sole to make setup and replacement easier.

The faux leather upper has a microfibre backing that makes the inner feel very plush and readily regulates sweat absorption. This dual-layer material feels beautifully smooth on its outer face too, extremely soft to the touch yet not as supple as a lightly woven fabric or mesh.

Unfortunately, the insoles aren’t adjustable for arch height – no wedge inserts are included – but they are good quality, dual-density products, with thicker, firmer, perforated foam beneath the metatarsal area. The right insole is emblazoned with the Sartoria Ciclistica slogan: We Ride For Coffee.

The lightly perforated synthetic upper has a lean, clean aesthetic, accentuated by the long down-to-the-toe lacing channel that promotes a precise, tailored fit. The shoe is almost entirely devoid of stitching, other than the retro toe bumper and black heel strip, which has the Sidi logo picked out in the same colours as the tongue.

Ah, yes, that multi-coloured tongue, the most striking feature of this shoe. Apparently, the four hues – muted shades of blue, red, yellow and green – are the house colours of Sartoria Ciclistica, a combination that looks stunning. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I think Sidi has successfully navigated the fine line that teasingly meanders between alla moda and cattivo gusto.

The tongue, which is made from the same microfibre-backed PU fabric as the rest of the upper, is both padded and perforated. It’s hard to spot at first glance, but it’s actually a continuation of the toe bumper, a testament to the craftsmanship that’s been invested in this shoe. Unusually, the tongue is held in place by a row of stitches that also secure the mid-lace guide on the arch (inner) side of the foot.

The rear inner, including the deep heel cup and generously padded collar, is lined with a soft, black microfibre mesh fabric that’s proudly stamped ‘Made In Italy’.

Where most brands use Boa dials, Sidi favours its own unidirectional rotary closure system that relies on a flip-up latch to tighten and two squeezable side paddles to release. The Laghèe Sprinter features one of these dials on each shoe, aligned with three pairs of symmetrically placed lace guides (including the guide incorporated within the dial). The laces are Dyneema, which is softer than the plastic-coated steel wire used by Boa. Both dial and laces are replaceable.

The Ride

The Laghèe Sprinter uses a traditional Sidi last, which is quite narrow both at the heel and forefoot. This, together with the deep heel cup, provides a ‘locked-in’ sensation that divides opinion. My large feet fall between narrow and wide – I hesitate to call them normal or even regular – which means I can usually get comfortable in most shoes. Yet I prefer a roomier toe box for longer rides as my feet tend to swell a little.

Very recently, Sidi has developed a ‘Millenium’ last with a wider toe box that works particularly well for me, but sadly, it’s not been adopted for this shoe. No matter, I found the slim fit secure but reassuringly comfy, even when putting the watts down.

Which brings me to the character of these shoes. The sole is super stiff, and despite the luxurious fabric, the upper remains on the unyielding side of pliant. This may not be an uncompromising race shoe like the Sidi Shot 2, but make no mistake, it’s no everyday commuter either. So, is the marketing promise of café-ride comfort disingenuous?

As always, it depends on your individual tastes and circumstances. If you prefer your caffeine and cake raids to be enjoyed at pace with a group of sharply dressed buddies, then this may just be the shoe for you. However, if you cycle at a more leisurely speed, happier to devote more time to slow-passing scenery than fast fashion, then it may be a little too hardcore. However, it’s worth remembering that personal preference plays a significant role in shoe choice. Some leisure-oriented riders will choose a stiffer sole over a more flexible shoe every time, purely because they find it more comfortable. There’s nothing wrong with that.

As well as being ultra-stiff, the slim carbon soles have a low stack height. I can’t say whether this quality made my riding more aero and efficient, but it certainly made me feel more connected with the bike.

Despite having only a single rotary closure dial, the long lace channel and stable tongue enabled me to tension the Dyneema laces conveniently, consistently and comfortably. The dial is so well made it feels bullet-proof in operation; I’m sure it will outlast the shoes. However, I found it slightly more fiddly to use than a Boa and, because it is unidirectional, making any subsequent adjustments on the move felt cumbersome.

Most of my riding for this review was completed at the tail-end of winter into early spring, with an initial burst or two on the turbo to ensure I’d positioned my cleats correctly. Excluding the turbo rides, temperatures ranged from around 5°C / 41°F in the early mornings to 16°C / 61°C at midday, with the upper figure being most representative. Within this temperature range, I found my pair of Laghèe Sprinters exceptionally comfortable. The microfibre-lined uppers and the limited number of perforations meant that my feet remained cosy, helped by a lack of cold air flushing through the body of the shoe. The vents in the sole are apparent on the move, but again, the airflow is relatively subtle. How this low level of venting plays out during the summer months remains to be seen.

Value and conclusions

At £350/$429 the Sidi Laghèe Sprinter is clearly an expensive shoe, one that’s only slightly cheaper than the brand’s cutting-edge race shoes, such as the Wire 2S and the Shot 2S. But that’s the point – this is essentially a top-tier race shoe that’s been detuned for fast café rides. Any marginal downturn in performance is compensated by an uplift in comfort and style.

What you get for your money is a quality, handmade European shoe with a top-notch carbon sole and removable, replaceable consumable components. Plus, of course, a generous sprinkling of Italian flair.

Build quality is simply superb, the materials used are of the highest quality, and there’s not a panel or stitch out of place. Just bear in mind that these aren’t the lightest shoes – mine weighed in at 365g per shoe but, to be fair, that is for a size 48.

The closest competitor I can think of is the Mechanism PNS x Fizik shoe, a special edition collaboration between Fizik and Pas Normal Studios that retails for an even pricier £390/$490.

Remove the fashion element, and it’s easy to find cycling shoes with comparable features selling for significantly less than these two examples. However, love it or hate it, style has been inextricably linked with cycling for decades, and few, if any, do it better than the Italians. If you’re an aesthete blessed with regular to narrow feet and a craving for espresso, you’re going to love this shoe.

Specs

• Stiffness rating (Sidi’s own): 12/12
• Sole: C-boost aerolite carbon sole
• Closure: Single rotary dial closure with Dyneema lace
• Consumables: Replaceable consumable parts
• Country of manufacture: Handmade in Italy
• Sizes: 40 – 48
• Weight: 365g per shoe in size 48

Curiously, Fizik has chosen to celebrate these harsh early races with one of its endurance models rather than a full-on race saddle. However, in the highly unlikely event that I was to ride a savage Monument, such as Paris-Roubaix, I’d want to lavish as much comfort on my derrière as humanly possible. So, it’s not an unwelcome surprise.

Construction

Fizik’s Tempo Argo R3 Les Classiques saddle is near-identical to a regular Tempo Argo R3, the only difference being the paint effect, which I rather like. Perhaps I’m being overly sappy, but I believe a dash of theatre enhances this perch by introducing a touch of much-needed fun.

Talking of touch, the Tempo Argo has more padding than its similar-looking stablemate, the Vento Argo. It’s easy to confuse the two, but the Vento is Fizik’s short-nosed, race-inspired saddle that features less padding, narrower width options – 140mm and 150mm vs the Tempo’s 150mm and 160mm – and a slightly narrower, more tapered nose with a subtle drop. Essentially, the Vento has been developed for riders wanting to assume a lower, more stretched-out aero stance on the bike, whereas the Tempo encourages a slightly more upright endurance position. However, both are performance saddles suitable for long, fast rides.

The Tempo Argo is available in three different versions: the premium carbon-railed R1, the Kium hollow-railed R3, which is the focus of this review, and the less expensive but hardly entry-level alloy-railed R5. They weigh a claimed 195g, 229g and 241g respectively, for a 150mm width.

This is a very contemporary-looking saddle that’s blessed with a somewhat brutal aesthetic that’s neither delicate nor pretty. Three features dominate: the relatively short 260mm length, the flexible, rubberised ‘wings’ and the wide diamond-shaped relief channel that Fizik says was developed using detailed pressure analysis and insights from medical experts. The conspicuously blunt nose tip is fairly chunky at approx. 38mm, which should provide more comfort, control and security when ‘on the rivet’.

To the casual eye, the Tempo Argo is predominately flat, but it actually exhibits a very subtle rise – about 10° – starting from the mid-section to the back. I’d guess this is to accommodate additional padding for the sit bones, and to arrest any backward slip when putting the power down.

Fizik says it’s used its proprietary Type 2 foam here, which is slightly softer and more progressive than the material used on its racing saddles. The thickness varies slightly, with more around the mid-section to support and secure the ischial sit bones.

It may be plusher than the Vento Argo, but the padding is still quite firm.

The foam is secured directly to a carbon-reinforced nylon shell that, in the case of the R3, rests on hollow 7 x 7mm Kium rails. Kium is a propriety alloy from Fizik that it says is lighter than titanium but shares similar dampening properties.

The Ride

I’m a big fan of the Tempo Argo because, put crudely, it has saved my arse in the past. A while ago, I attended a bike launch near Girona, where the host brand led the press on a six-hour ride into the local hills to showcase its new endurance bike. It was an epic day on an unfamiliar bike, made all the more remarkable because nobody complained of any discomfort. I was so impressed with the ride that the name of the saddle has stuck with me ever since – Fizik Tempo Argo R3.

The Tempo Argo’s comparatively wide stance – I’ve been testing the narrower 150mm version – is perfect for the kind of fast endurance rides that find me sitting up a little taller for the sake of long-term comfort. However, when descending or tucking out of the wind, the short front and vast cutout allow me to adopt an aggressive position without suffering.

A wide fit can, of course, lead to chafing, but fortunately, I haven’t found this to be the case with the Tempo Argo. This could be because the saddle really isn’t that wide, or perhaps Fizik’s Wingflex feature deserves some credit. The carbon-reinforced nylon shell has little rubber inserts at the tips that cushion the rider’s thighs on every pedal stroke, but not to the extent they rob watts. Truthfully, while it was easy to flex the shell wings with my hands, I couldn’t discern any movement during my rides. Not that it matters since I remained comfortable, but your mileage may differ.

As previously mentioned, the padding feels quite dense and unyielding but that’s the way I like it on an endurance saddle. There is noticeably more cushion to support the sit bones, which together with the subtle rearward tilt, help to lightly lock the riding position in place.

Unsurprisingly, there’s little scope to move around on a saddle as short as this, but when you do want to shift position, the faux leather cover won’t hold you back. Perhaps it’s just me, but I dislike the grippy, rubberised material that covers some contemporary saddles. Every time I want to move my weight back or forth, I seem to be forever snagging the seat of my riding shorts. I found the Tempo Argo smooth enough to get a glide on yet just about grippy enough not to be full-on slippery. Of course, this is a personal preference that’s entirely subjective, so you may prefer to be more securely held in place.

I tried this saddle on a variety of bikes, including a stiff, aluminium-framed Standert Kreissäge RS, a moderately stiff Ribble Allroad SL R endurance bike and a compliant Wilier Jena gravel bike. I’d be lying if I told you I could tell the difference between Kium rails and standard alloy rails. Carbon rails? Perhaps, but frankly the frame, wheel choice and, most notably, tyre choice influence ride quality so much more than the makeup of your saddle rails. Kium does, however, bring a moderate weight saving, which will be important to many.

Value and conclusions

Let’s start with a huge caveat. The best saddle for you is the one that fits, so even though I loved my time with the Fizik Tempo Argo R3, you may find it a complete pain in the proverbial. That’s the nature of saddles.

Short saddles with big cutouts are very popular right now, and I’m a devotee because they’re a great match for me and my riding. However, they’re not without their faults, the most significant being a lack of control – it’s harder to steer the bike through the hips – and they’re a very restrictive platform if you like to move around on the saddle.

That said, if you’ve got your heart set on a short-nosed saddle, the Tempo Argo R3, which retails for £149.99/$159.99 should make your shortlist. The obvious competitor is Specialized’s Power, which is shorter at 240mm and available in more width options: 143mm, 155mm and 168mm. The titanium-railed Power Arc Expert is slightly cheaper than the Fizik at £115/$159.99.

The Prologo Dimension 143 with Tirox (steel-alloy) rails is another comparable short-nosed saddle that is also slightly cheaper at £139/$139. I recommend experimenting with some samples before purchasing the one that fits you best.

Specs

• Length: 260 mm
• Width: 150 mm or 160mm
• Weight: 229g/235g claimed. My 150mm saddle weighed 240g.
• Height at 75mm width: 43 mm
• Length from nose to 75mm width: 103 mm
• Rail: 7x7 mm
• Shell: carbon-reinforced nylon with flexible rubberised wings
• Padding: Proprietary Type 2 foam
• Shape: Flat

It's tempting to mark this annual milestone with the purchase of new kit, the cyclist's equivalent of a Christmas Day outfit, but the cost of some of best women's short sleeve cycling jerseys is often triple digits, making it hard to justify.

That's why the Madison Flux short sleeve jersey really made me sit up and take notice. It looks sleek and smart, offers practical features, and is less than half the price of even the most wallet-friendly options already on the market.

Construction

Madison says the Flux is made from a premium soft-touch fabric, which consists of 85% Polyester and 15% Elastane. Known for its sweat-wicking and moisture transfer capabilities, this is pretty standard fare for most cycling jerseys, such as the Santini Ombra short sleeve jerseys.

The difference is that the Flux's five-panel design is entirely constructed with the same fabric, without any additional high-tech sections for enhanced breathability or aerodynamics.

That's not to say that the Madison Flux eliminates all performance features; the raw cut, silicone-backed sleeves, and rear hem are designed for a performance fit and a stay-put finish.

There are practical features as well, including three rear pockets and an additional zip-secure pocket for valuables, although it's not large enough for phone storage. It also has a full-length zip, which is often missing on cheaper jerseys, along with small reflective details.

Details like the soft-touch collar and articulated cut enhance both comfort and fit. All of this adds up to a jersey weighing 164g in a size small.

The ride

It was mid-ride when I truly became astounded by the Madison Flux short-sleeve cycling jersey. Pulling it on pre-ride, I was impressed with the body-skimming fit. It's perhaps a little looser than options that profess to be climbing or aero-specific fits but it's still tight enough not to look out of place on the road.

I was also happy to pair it with the more relaxed style of adventure-focused kit for my first ride. Being early April, I required an additional layer over the Flux, until I warmed up. Thirty minutes and one hill ticked off, I was able to go with the Flux jersey alone. I stuffed my long-sleeved jersey into the ample rear pocket of the Flux and continued my ride.

Even with the rear pockets now bulging, the jersey stayed firmly in place, with no twisting even when climbing out of the saddle. It's super comfortable, and even though it doesn't claim to use any specific technical fabric, it really does have a soft-touch finish. Elsewhere details such as the hot pink strengthening tape on the pocket inner haven't gone unnoticed; it's a minor feature, but it added a touch of class that could easily be left out.

I've been lucky enough to experience an early spring mini-heatwave and bask in high teen temperatures, and pairing the Madison Flux jersey with a mid-weight short-sleeve baselayer has been ideal.

Since the first ride, I've combined it with baggy shorts for a gravel ride, hit a mountain bike trail center, and simply rolled around on the road wearing it. It is looser than most 'performance' cycling jerseys, but not flappy by any means—just not super-tight in the torso. I was testing a size small, UK size 8, which indicates that sizes run large since I tend to be a UK size 10 these days in civilian clothes.

The arm length makes it easy to team with arm warmers, and adding a vest makes it a great in-between-season jersey.

Without breathable underarm panels, I do wonder how it will perform in high summer, but living on the edge of the Peak District in the north of England, those days are few and far between, so I suspect I'll be looking to wear it more often than not.

The one element that could be improved is the lack of reflective elements. I wish brands would either leave them off rather than include small versions or make them a decent size that is visible to other road users. Otherwise, it merely draws my attention to how pointless it is.

Value and conclusion

I've honestly been astonished by the value of the Madison Flux short-sleeved cycling jersey. It punches well above its weight in terms of fit, comfort, and performance. I do think that it would be impossible to pick it out as a budget option in a lineup of much more expensive offerings.

Clothing this good, at this price can be a red flag. So, being curious, I've dug a little into Madison's Corporate Social Responsibility. You'll have to take its word for it, but reading through the information, there appears to be a strong commitment to responsible and ethical business practices; it's even part of the Freewheel Network, which supports local bike shops.

There are three colors on offer and five sizes to choose from, which means there's lots to consider, although if you are petite, you may find even the smallest size too big. All told, it's a great buy, will suit all riding styles, and has the potential to become a go-to jersey between spring and autumn. Other than the minute reflective details, there's nothing not to like about the impressive £39.99 price tag.

The S version of the Vulpine is WTB’s fastest gravel tyre, substituting the lightly chevroned centre line of the original for a fully slick ridge. It’s aimed at gravel racers who value speed and low rolling resistance above all else, and definitely isn’t a general, all-round kind of option.

It’s available in 700c x 40mm and 45mm widths and comes with either black or tan sidewalls. Anyone choosing this type of tyre is unlikely to be using 650b wheels, I guess.

Construction

With a full name that includes more letters than a postman’s sack, the WTB Vulpine S 45 x 700 TCS Light/Fast Rolling 120tpi Dual DNA SG tyre proudly wears its tech on its sleeve. Its defining feature is the fully slick centre line, differentiating it from the standard Vulpine, which has a central ridge with tread. The shoulders of both tyres are identical, with a rounded profile that has larger lugs on the edge with smaller knobs next to the centre line.

The idea with the Vulpine S is to provide the least rolling resistance possible when going in a straight line while still providing grip when cornering. As WTB says, it is a ‘race-focused’ tyre.

As for the initialisms: TCS stands for ‘tubeless compatible system’, ‘Light/Fast Rolling’ denotes the tyre’s level within the range (although all their gravel tyres are this level), 120tpi is the thread count, with higher numbers indicating a more supple ride, ‘Dual DNA’ is the rubber compound that combines durable and grippy areas and finally, ‘SG’ indicates that it has puncture protection in the sidewalls.

WTB claims that a 700 x 45c Vulpine S with tan sidewalls weighs 560g, and the two I tested sat on the scales at 560g and 567g, so pretty darn close to spec.

The ride

As often seems to be the way with gravel tyres as opposed to tubeless road tyres, installation and inflation on my carbon wheels was very easy, and air retention (using WTB sealant) was also nigh on perfect right from the start. The inflated width was bang on the stated 45mm.

I have to confess, I did wait a few weeks after putting the tyres on for the trails to dry out a bit—there is no doubt that the Vulpine S and mud would not be the cosiest of bedfellows, and nor are they intended to be. However, once the wind and occasional burst of sunshine had done their job and dried out the Peak District, I went out on some regular loops.

Sections of road and smooth trails were despatched quickly and efficiently, without the characteristic buzz that usually accompanies knobbly tyres on that sort of terrain. Rougher tracks were also fine, as long as they were dry or rocky, with the fairly large-volume tyres doing a good job of providing comfortable passage.

On steeper or muddier ground, I was always aware that there was a finite amount of traction available, and so I tried to ride with measured inputs so as not to overwhelm the tread. It was a similar story with braking - it was quite tricky to modulate stopping power as just a fraction too much pull resulted in the tyre losing grip and sliding. I was understandably cautious when using the front brake!

I didn’t suffer any issues cornering, on or off-road, but again, I was suitably respectful of the tyre’s design brief and didn’t try any extreme lean angles. To be fair, the shoulder lugs are a similar size to those found on many other gravel tyres, so once engaged there should be some grip but it is still a little disconcerting barrelling towards a bend only to glance down and see what looks like a rather smoother tyre, thanks to the slick centre line.

None of these comments are meant as criticisms. WTB clearly aims the Vulpine S at gravel racers, who could be expected to have a decent level of skill and who should understand the tyre’s benefits and limitations. I enjoyed my rides on the Vulpine S; it was great not to feel (and hear) energy being sucked away by big lugs, but where I ride in the Dark Peak is quite sandy and drains quickly with nice, grippy gritstone trails. I don’t think I’d have had such a good time in the White Peak, for instance, with slippery limestone and claggy soil.

Value and Conclusion

Tyre choice for off-road riding is nearly always a compromise. A balance between durability, weight, grip and rolling resistance. The WTB Vulpine S clearly sits at the less grip, more speed end of the gravel tyre spectrum and should be judged as such.

These are not year-round, multi-purpose fit-and-forget tyres. If you ride somewhere suitable and/or are prepared to swap tyres or wheels as appropriate to the conditions, then the Vulpine S will shine in the right circumstances, providing a rewarding return on any effort put in.

It costs £65, which is neither cheap nor expensive for a decent, tubeless gravel tyre. Value rather depends on how much use you are likely to get out of a dry weather tyre, but if you are prepared to accept its limitations, then the Vulpine S is reasonable value given its performance and feature set.

I gave my initial thoughts on the Red AXS groupset back at the time of launch, and that was after about 1,250km of riding. Since then, however, I have spent many more hours getting to know the groupset, as well as direct comparisons with Shimano’s range-topping alternative. So how does it stack up 12 months on? Has the love affair continued, and is it really enough to make me switch tribe?

Shifting performance: precision, but not perfection

Shift quality is of course the primary function of any groupset, and it’s where SRAM Red AXS comes incredibly close to brilliance but falls just short of being truly class-leading. The system is undeniably precise - since ride one I have found that rear shifts are pure, crisp, and never miss a beat. All these kilometers later, even through the torrid British winter, my view remains unchanged. Whether under load or in the most unpredictable riding conditions, the rear derailleur executes gear changes flawlessly, delivering a level of confidence that allows you to ignore the groupset, and let it get on with the job in hand. True delegation, if you will.

Up front, the improvements over previous SRAM groupsets are significant, but there is more to be done. It’s well documented (including by myself) that older iterations could be hesitant or even problematic under pressure, Red AXS feels far stiffer and more robust in general. I have managed to get it to hesitate here and there, but the frequency with which this happens is far lower, drastically narrowing the gap to Dura-Ace.

However, there’s still one area where it lags - if you’ll pardon the pun - speed. While Red AXS is quick, it doesn’t quite match the lightning response time of Shimano Dura-Ace Di2. This is down in no small part to the time delay caused by the double tap shift system. Double tap works by pressing both shift buttons at the same time, and as a result, the groupset requires around 50ms to be sure that you are pressing both levers at the same time for a front mech shift, or indeed just a single button for a rear mech shift. The fraction-of-a-second delay isn’t a dealbreaker, but when you ride the groupsets back to back, you can’t help but notice the difference.

Braking & Ergonomics: Best in Class, With Minor Trade-offs

When it comes to braking, SRAM Red eTap AXS is, without question, the best on the market. The combination of superb modulation and the lightest lever action available makes for an outstanding braking experience. Someone should really give Sram a ‘most improved’ award here too, because the difference between the old and new groupset is almost frightening. I’ve since back to back tested the old and new Sram Red, all tested alongside Dura-Ace and the difference between all three is stark.

The pivot point placement within the lever system ensures that even under hard braking, minimal force is required. This has real-world benefits - lighter braking action allows the upper body to remain relaxed, which in turn improves control and stability, especially on long descents where fatigue can creep in. The ability to brake with such little effort translates directly to better cornering confidence, something that is often less talked about when it comes to groupsets, but I truly believe there is a link here.

Ergonomically, SRAM has nailed the hood shape for general riding. The levers feel natural in the hand, particularly when paired with slightly flared bars, and provides excellent grip and control. For gravel riding, they’re arguably superior to Shimano, thanks to the slightly larger hood profile, which offers better grip and a more stable platform over rough terrain.

That said, there’s one area where the design isn’t quite perfect. When riding in a more aggressive, aero-focused position - forearms flat, hands resting on the tops of the hoods - the slight outward flare of the brake lever blades can feel a little awkward. It’s not a dealbreaker, and for many riders, it won’t even be noticeable, but compared to Shimano’s more neutral lever profile, it’s a minor drawback.

Build quality: a big improvement

SRAM has made significant strides in build quality with this generation of Red AXS, bringing it much closer to Shimano in terms of durability and refinement. The materials feel premium, and the overall robustness of the components has noticeably improved over previous versions.

That said, there are still a few areas where it falls slightly short. While the shifting buttons are tactile and responsive, they lack the crisp, precise feel of Shimano’s. It’s a small detail, but one that’s noticeable in day-to-day use. Aesthetically, it’s a matter of personal taste - I still lean toward Dura-Ace’s sleeker look, but Red AXS remains a sharp, high-end groupset.

My biggest gripe, however, is the integrated power meter chainrings. SRAM doesn’t allow you to replace just the chainrings - you have to buy an entirely new power meter unit. This adds unnecessary cost and isn’t great from a sustainability standpoint. That said, Sram will discount your replacement unit.

Features & usability: Intuitive, and rider-friendly

While the pro’s might not bat an eyelid when it comes to liveability, we here at Cycling Weekly certainly do. Bikes are getting trickier and trickier to service, whether that’s for the home mechanic or bike shops, and as such having good support for any product is essential - groupsets included. Sram’s Red AXS - and their other electronic groupsets for that matter, do this fairly well, for a number of reasons.

First up, the rechargeable batteries. They remain unchanged, yet undoubtedly one of the best aspects of the system - lightweight, long-lasting, and incredibly easy to charge. The fact that you can swap batteries between derailleurs in case of emergency is a huge plus. In real-world riding, I consistently got around 1,000 km per charge, which is completely respectable for an electronic drivetrain. Charging is quick and hassle-free, making battery anxiety a non-issue. I still prefer the removable batteries to Shimano’s system too, purely because it means you don’t have to bring your whole bike to a charger. If your bike is filthy, or locked up in the garage, you can remove the batteries and charge them indoors, just like any other accessory.

Then there are the ‘bonus buttons’ on the hoods - a fantastic addition, albeit one where the American brand was playing catchup to Shimano. These customizable buttons can be used for shifting, scrolling through head unit screens, or even activating certain bike computer functions. For off-road and adventure riders, they add a layer of control that’s genuinely useful. Personally, I set them up for shifting, particularly for use in an aero position. They’re well-placed, tactile, and have proven durable over time.

Finally, SRAM’s AXS app has seen continuous improvements, making it arguably the most intuitive drivetrain app of the big three. It’s easier to navigate than Shimano’s eTube, offering a clean, visual dashboard for checking battery life, adjusting shifting preferences, and saving a setup to a bike or an account.

Who is it for? Adventure riders take note

While SRAM Red AXS is undoubtedly a high-performance groupset, its real strengths shine in endurance and adventure riding rather than pure racing. I’ve spent years chasing every minute gain there is in the cycling world, and the racer inside me, still believes that Shimano Dura-Ace Di2 holds the edge when it comes to outright speed. The faster shift times and slightly more refined ergonomics in aggressive aero positions make Di2 the better choice for riders who prioritise racing performance above all else. However, this is clearly personal preference too - Sram Red AXS is slightly lighter after all.

For long days in the saddle, though, mixed terrain, and general usability, SRAM Red AXS starts to eek ahead. Its excellent braking performance, easy-to-live-with wireless setup, and intuitive shift logic make it a fantastic choice for endurance riders and those spending more time on the hoods than in a full tuck. The ability to swap batteries, customize shifting through the AXS app, and rely on consistent modulation for long descents adds to its appeal.

Where SRAM is unquestionably ahead, though, is in 1x gravel riding. The Red XPLR variant, while not the focus of this review, shares many core components with Red AXS and is simply the best electronic option for dedicated gravel setups. If you’re tackling rough roads, big climbs, and unpredictable terrain, SRAM’s ability to support 1x drivetrains natively makes it the clear winner.

Ultimately, both SRAM and Shimano are incredibly close at the top level, and truth be told, I think I still sit on the Shimano side of the fence. However I most definitely find myself with less and less grounds on which to make that argument - the gap is closing.

Your move, Shimano!

Value

When it comes to value, I am going to put SRAM's individual component and groupset price to one side, purely because almost no one actually buys a groupset on its own - instead, you are generally buying an off the shelf bike.

The fact is, when you compare range-topping bikes from Canyon, Giant, Specialized, and others, generally speaking you are paying a minimum of a $500/£500 for a Sram Red AXS model bike over a Shimano Dura-Ace equivalent, and that is not insignificant.

For the right person, I would say that the cost is genuinely justified - perhaps if you are in the market for an all-road bike, or truly prefer the ergonomics of the Sram system having tried both.

For many though, I think that this cost, even in the premium market, may just be enough to put consumers off a Sram build over a Shimano one, and the bottom line is, that's why I am still in camp Shimano - JUST!

I’m a big fan of the e-bike boom we’re experiencing—not just because I’m a lifelong cyclist, but because e-bikes are the great equaliser. They make it easier than ever for people to embrace life on two wheels, maybe drive a little less, and spend more time outdoors. E-bikes let me share my passion with a wider group of people while encouraging a more sustainable lifestyle.

But buying an e-bike can be a daunting and expensive experience, especially if you’re just e-bike-curious and not quite ready to go all in. That’s why one of the most accessible alternatives is converting the bike you already have.

Electric conversion kits are becoming increasingly common, and they’re a smart concept. So many of us have a neglected bike collecting dust in a garage or shed. These kits not only give those bikes a second life, they’re a user-friendly entry into e-biking without the cost of buying a whole new setup.

So when I was offered the chance to review the Swytch GO conversion kit, I was eager to give it a try. Cycling Weekly testers had previously given high marks to the Swytch Air setup, praising its quick installation and sleek design. The Swytch GO+ promised similar ease of use and compatibility, but with the added benefit of a longer battery range.

I took on a long-term review to test its user-friendliness, assess how it performed as a daily around-town ride, and determine whether its $654 / £499 price tag makes it a compelling alternative to an entry-level e-bike.

Overall, the Swytch GO+ conversion kit was a positive experience—but there are a few things I wish I’d known going in that would have made for a smoother process.

Swytch GO​ electric conversion kit

The Swytch GO is an e-bike conversion kit that transforms your existing bicycle into an e-bike by replacing the front wheel with a 250w motor hub and attaching a frame-mounted battery pack to the centre of your bike and, optionally, a display onto your handlebars.

What’s in the box

• A front wheel with a 250w hub motor, providing 40nm of torque and speeds up to 15mph (in the UK/Europe), 20mph in the U.S.
• A Power Pack GO+
  • 280Wh
  • Range: 30-40 miles
  • Weight: 2500g
  • Charge time: 4 hours
• Pedal sensors
• An LED handlebar-mounted display
• Charger
• Cables, wires, attachments
• Price: Starts at $525 for the smaller 15-20-mile range, $654 for the 30-40-mile range, and $774 for the 40-60-mile range.

How it works:

Once you’ve installed the kit, power on the battery pack and the display. The moment you start pedaling, the pedal sensor should detect movement and the hub will engage and offer assist. The pedal sensor communicates with the motor controller, which in turn communicates with the hub and the battery pack. It regulates the flow of electricity from the battery to the motor wheel, controlling speed and torque based on rider input from sensors. When you stop pedaling, the hub disengages.

5 Things I wish I’d known before reviewing the Swytch Go e-bike conversion kit

1. Choose your bike very carefully

Swytch claims that its products “fit almost any bike.” Yet my stable of bikes proved to be the exception. While the Swytch motor wheel can accommodate both rim and disc brakes (with a bolt-on rotor), the GO range is not thru-axle compatible. Swytch tells me thru-axle wheels are coming soon—at least for the MAX+ range—but in the meantime, this rendered 95% of my bikes incompatible. That left me with a steel Surly Midnight Special and an aluminium Raleigh Rainier single-speed cyclocross bike. The fork on neither bike readily accepted the wheel without modifications (more on that below), and in the end, I opted to fit the kit to my Raleigh.

It wasn’t long before I realised this had been a mistake. The Raleigh Rainier is a fairly light bike, and the addition of the kit quite literally doubled its weight, significantly affecting handling. On my scale, the Swytch motor wheel—without tube and tyre—weighed 6.57 pounds. The battery pack, cables and accessories added another 8.4 pounds, bringing the total weight gain to 14.97 pounds (6.79 kg). With the front wheel outweighing the rear by so much, the bike felt unbalanced.

Additionally, when converting a single-speed, you’ll likely want to change the gearing. With pedal assist, I found myself spinning out far too quickly with the existing setup. This required a trip to my local bike shop for a larger chainring and a new chain.

In retrospect, a heavier, geared bike would have been a better choice than a light single-speed.

2. Get ready to make some modifications

“The Swytch GO is compatible with universal-type bikes and supports wheel sizes from 26 inches and up,” states Swytch.

But by “universal-type bikes,” they specifically mean bikes with a 100mm front axle and 9mm or 10mm dropouts.

The website includes a handy compatibility form but the listing is somewhat limited. While my contact at Swytch assured me that one of my bikes would be able to fit the kit, it wasn’t without some modifications and time investment.

Upon receiving the kit, I realised the axle of the motor wheel was too big for the forks on both of my quick-release-equipped bikes. In this scenario, Swytch recommends filing down the axle flats until they fit. So off to the hardware store I went to pick up a metal file. I carefully filed—taking care not to damage the threads—then tested the fit, then filed some more. It took quite a while to remove the approximately 1mm of aluminium needed for the axle to fit into the dropouts.

I got it to fit in the end, but it was a cumbersome process and, to be honest, it dampened some of the “new bike day” excitement.

3. It's not as clean looking I thought

Here’s how the website depicts the kit:

Here’s what it looks in real life

On the website, the Swytch GO kit looks sleek, with clean lines that don’t disrupt the bike’s silhouette. In reality, there are wires and zip ties everywhere. The pedal sensor by the crank arm needs to communicate with the motor controller inside the battery pack, which is mounted somewhere in the bike’s main triangle. The front hub also needs to send and receive signals and power, and finally, the handlebar display must be plugged in for power and data. That means you’re running cables all over the bike. Swytch includes a wire harness to manage all these connections, but they still need to be secured to the frame in some way. And, unless you’re handy with shortening and soldering wires, you are also likely to end up bunching up the excess and zip-tying them to the frame. Or, as I did, stuffing them all into a frame bag in a half-hearted attempt to tidy things up.

Call me vain, but I care about my bike’s aesthetics—and the messy look is a bit off-putting.

4. The battery is easy removed – but also easily stolen

The GO power pack attached to the bike frame using a set of strong velcro straps. This allows the user to attach the battery pack wherever it’s convenient—be it the top tube, downtube, seat tube or luggage rack. It works well: the velcro straps are secure and the battery does not sway or rattle at all. The pack can also be easily removed for charging or swapped between bikes should you have multiple Swytch-equipped bikes.

However, this also means it can be easily stolen. This may be a non-issue if you live in a safe area, have secure bike parking, or don’t intend to use the Swytch system on a commuter bike. But if security is a concern, your best option is to remove the battery and carry it with you. At nearly six pounds, though, it’s not very convenient.

If you’re using the Swytch kit for your commute, perhaps the Swytch Air would be a better option. It’s more portable and for many, a 15-to-20 mile range is plenty for a day of commuting.

5. It’s going to convince that you do want an e-bike

Once you’re out and riding, most of the downsides quickly fade into the background. It’s genuinely fun to ride. The 250w motor—while on the lower end of the power scale, delivers smooth, steady assistance. It’s also pleasantly quiet.

The steps in between the levels of assistance are gradual, though I admittedly found myself mostly using levels 3 to 5. It feels like riding with a perpetual and steady tailwind, carrying you to your destination. It’s great for stop-and-go city riding and adds a little joy to otherwise mundane trips. Most of all, it encourages you to get out on your bike more often.

In other words, the conversion kit effectively offers the joys and conveniences of a regular e-bike at a smaller price tag. But that brings me to the final question: should you invest in a Swytch Go or just buy an entry-level e-bike?

Conversion kit or entry-level e-bike?

The answer truly depends on your needs and priorities. If you already own a compatible bike that you love, enjoy a bit of hands-on tinkering, and like the idea of giving an old frame a new lease on life, the Swytch Go is a compelling and cost-effective introduction to e-biking.

That said, if you’re already leaning towards buying an e-bike, I’d be inclined to recommend investing in a purpose-built entry-level model.

The kit reviewed here retails for $654/£499 , not including extras like a new chainring, chain, and installation tools. For a slightly higher investment, in the $1,000 to $1,500 (£755 to £1,150) range, brands like Lectric, Velotric, Ride1Up, and Aventon offer ready-to-ride e-bikes with the integrated features and conveniences of modern bikes. For example, many of these models come equipped with fenders/mudguards, integrated lighting and cargo carrying capabilities. Also, most of these bikes tend to come with more powerful motors and larger batteries, offering enhanced range and torque.

While going this route means acquiring and storing another bike, if your old ride is gathering dust anyway, consider donating it to a local charity or community cycling programme for a second life with someone else.

The Swytch GO is a clever solution for the right rider. But as e-bikes are getting more affordable, the value proposition is fading. If you’re looking for everyday utility, convenience, and plug-and-play simplicity, a purpose-built e-bike may be the smarter long-term investment.

Since its inception, WYN Republic (WYN, for short) has focused on small-batch, finely crafted running, cycling, triathlon, and athleisure apparel with crisp colors and clean designs.

The McKenzies specialise in Iron-distance triathlons (2.4-mile swim, 112-mile bike, 26.2-mile run), and when they launched WYN, they wanted to make a triathlon kit that was comfortable enough and stylish enough to keep its wearer happy for a race of 140.6 miles.

Today, WYN Republic offers three “families” of tri suits: Hi Velocity, Luceo, and, most recently, CdA (coefficient of aerodynamic drag), which I will review here. With one of the industry’s highest prices for a tri kit, I knew this kit needed to be tested for comfort, fit, and aerodynamics.

Construction

While WYN has always prioritised aerodynamics in addition to comfort and style, the CdA suit is its most technically advanced kit yet. It took nearly two years to design and test in the pursuit of every Watt.

The CdA kit comes in a nifty black matte box covered in the CdA equation and other math-y looking details. Similar to how an Apple product box seems to “pause” before fully opening, so too does the CdA kit box. You feel like you’re opening something luxe.

The kit's legs feel hydrophobic and “matte” in the sense that I wouldn’t describe them as silky, but they are soft. The legs have side pockets that lay flat against the side of one’s thighs and are so flush with the rest of the leg fabric that I didn’t notice them at first. Additionally, the legs offer coverage down to just a couple of inches(5 cm) above where the leg bends at the knee.

The top of the one-piece kit is soft, too, but again, I wouldn’t describe it as silky. It feels sturdy and high-quality. Ripples in the arm coverings go to just above the elbow and part of the torso. These ripples make an appearance in many top-level tri-kits as a way to disrupt airflow and result in a… You guessed it… lower CdA.

• Italian ultra-lightweight textile technology with Italian aerodynamic textured ribbed fabric on sleeves and torso side panels
• Swiss Coldblack fabric front panel with treated cooling qualities
• Fabric offers UV protection of SPF 35+
• Ice pocket on the back of neck, two internal front pockets, two pockets on the side of each thigh
• Micro-mesh underarm panels for hyper-flexibility and unrestricted swim stroke
• Dolomiti Grigno triathlon specific 3mm chamois
• Signature "full zip" front opening with flip-lock YKK zipper.
• Heat bonded arm cuffs
• Seamless shorts construction
• Precision laser cut hem openings with integrated silicone leg gripper for a seamless finish
• One style: white top with black shorts
• Sizes: XS through XXL
• A wee bit of soft fabric that prevents the zipper from chafing your sternum area - a great touch!

The Ride

Because it is still too frigid in Colorado to test a tri suit - and one with cooling capabilities - outside, I tested the CdA kit for a two-hour-long trainer ride indoors. I rode my tri bike and spent most of the ride in the aero position, as one would during a half or full-distance Ironman.

The first thing I noticed is that the kit feels well-constructed. There were no crackling sounds of threads stretching or breaking as I pulled the kit on, and the kit immediately sat on my body without the need to tug the fabric into place.

The second observation I had was that the kit is surprisingly stretchy. In the past, the more aerodynamic a tri kit claimed to be, the stiffer its fabric was. This may have been an attempt to “lock” a kit into place on one’s body to minimise any fabric drag.

Regardless, the CdA kit had plenty of stretch, especially in the underarms and back, which is critical for the swim portion of a triathlon. Additionally, I am quite tall at six feet with extremely broad shoulders, and in the past, this has meant fighting with other women’s kits to get the kit to zip. I was pleased that the size-large women’s CdA kit zipped up with no problem and fit my expansive shoulders and back without a fight.

My 0.5-star reduction comes from that same stretch applied to the kit's shorts. Some may brush this off as a personal gripe and not worthy of a ½ star detraction, but for as well as the top half fit, the shorts of the CdA kit were just a smidge too large, bunching up in the front of my groin more than I’d like the longer I pedalled. This didn’t cause me any chafing, but it was noticeable enough to warrant a mention in this review.

This issue may be specific to my anatomy - those size-large broad shoulders are paired with size-medium hips and thighs - but that body type isn’t rare in triathlon, so I thought it was worth mentioning. I think I’d almost need a “medium tall” size to find the perfect fit in not just the CdA suit but also most women’s triathlon kits.

Besides the slightly lengthy shorts part of the kit, the CdA kit felt like a feather-light second skin as I grinded away on the trainer. It was incredibly light and breathable, with no hotspots forming even as the sweat dripped down my back and legs. I was impressed by how quickly the leg fabric dried and how cool my core stayed in the torso fabric (and I rode the trainer with no fan on, folks).

Perhaps most importantly for triathletes, the chamois was barely there but also very comfortable. It was so nice, in fact, that I forgot I was wearing a thinner triathlon-specific chamois and felt just as satisfied with the CdA chamois as I would in thicker cycling bibs.

Value and Conclusion

When I consider the type of athlete—elite—and the racing conditions—hot and humid—this kit was made for, I would recommend it in a heartbeat. Its attention to detail, like the internal pockets, cooling fabric, and rippled torso panels, is obvious and effective.

The CdA kit has also proven its worth on the race course, with notable results like Ironman World Champion, Chelsea Sodaro's win in the 2024 Ironman New Zealand and Leon Chevalier's fourth-place finish at Kona last season.

For $700, though, this is not a kit for everyone; in fairness, it’s not marketed that way. This kit is listed for triathletes looking to gain every possible legal aerodynamic edge across mid- and long-distance triathlons. And often, those types of triathletes are also the type to drop $700 on a kit, especially one that claims to save seven minutes over an Iron-distance.

This kit's “second skin” feeling immediately appealed to me for the types of triathlons I love: those in hot and humid conditions. When cycling in places like the Kona lava fields, you want the “coolest” gear, in both the temperature and style.

Ultimately, this is a hyper-elite triathlon kit for true enthusiasts who are looking for a PB or to be competitive, rather than just a finisher - just don’t tell your accountant.

I've been testing the jersey over the last few weeks as the UK finally begins to thaw out, and while the Aeon carries a hefty price tag, it’s an impressive piece of kit. Here's how it stacks up against the best short sleeve jerseys for long summer rides.

MAAP Aeon Jersey: Construction

MAAP says the Aeon jersey is designed to "get out of your way and let you ride," and to be fair, they’ve done a good job of making it feel that way. The main fabric is Polartec® Delta™ - a high-tech, evaporative cooling material that supposedly enhances your body's natural temperature control. According to MAAP, its 3D knit structure lifts the jersey slightly off the skin to promote airflow. Marketing aside, I’ve found it breathes exceptionally well, particularly when the sun breaks through the clouds and things warm up.

The fabric has a slightly retro look at first glance - almost old school in texture - but once on the body, it’s a different story. It’s soft, subtly elasticated, and molds nicely without ever feeling clingy. I’m 6'0, 69kg with broad shoulders and a slim waist, and the fit was absolutely spot on. No pulling across the chest, no sag around the stomach - just a well-balanced, close fit.

MAAP’s design ethos leans toward minimalism here, with clean lines, a low-profile collar, and a wide front hem that stays put without relying on grippy silicone. I do think the 4-way stretch fabric plays a big part in the comfort - more on that later.

At the rear, you’ve got three nicely-sized pockets made from a different, more structured material. I really like this from both an aesthetic and practical standpoint. They're deep enough to handle everything I usually stuff in - a pump, tools, phone, and snacks. The zip pocket is a welcome inclusion, though the opening is a little tight - something to consider if you’re trying to fish out a key or card mid-ride.

As for the sleeves, they’re finished without rubber grippers, and instead rely on a sewn-in construction that sits flat and stays in place. It’s subtle, sleek, and - most importantly - very comfortable.

MAAP Aeon Jersey: The ride

After a long winter spent layering up, it's been a treat to get out in short sleeves again. The Aeon jersey has slotted into my regular rotation with ease. From the first ride, it felt built for distance - unfussy, breathable, and reassuringly stable even with loaded pockets.

The fit is perhaps what surprised me most. This isn’t an aero jersey, but it wears like one - snug through the shoulders and arms, but with a slightly more relaxed body that makes it ideal for those chasing all-day comfort over all-out speed. It’s a rare blend that works well for riders like me, who appreciate a race cut but don’t want to feel like they’re wearing a skinsuit at the café stop.

The wide, fabric-only hem at the front means no digging in at the waist, and the collar sits low and unobtrusive, even on warmer rides. The sleeves are nice and long, and never once rode up, even on longer stints in the drops.

MAAP Aeon Jersey: Value and conculsion

At £170, the Aeon is firmly planted in the upper tier of the jersey market. That’s £30 more than Pas Normal’s Mechanism jersey and a full £50 more than Rapha’s Pro Team. It’s a big ask, particularly given how competitive the premium segment has become in recent years.

That said, this is a seriously well-executed jersey. It’s comfortable, sharp-looking, and packed with technical detail that doesn’t get in your face. The fit will suit riders who want something performance-oriented without the hyper-compression of true aero gear.

Is it the best value option out there? No. But if you’re chasing long, hot miles and want kit that’ll go the distance without fuss - or if you're simply looking to treat yourself - it’s a compelling option.

Just maybe wait for a sale if you’re budget-conscious...

Before I got my hands on this choice piece of kit, I had a wonderful chat with Will Hart from Cane Creek to talk about the Invert. We really got into it, covering the brand's intent, the limitations, what to expect, and how best to enjoy the suspension gravel fork. After the chat, I was genuinely excited to put the Invert to the test, and I started planning my strategy on how to best put this fork through the wringer.

My plan was to first test the fork on my dedicated drop-bar rig, a Nukeproof Digger, as this bike fits the fork's intention. Then, to make things even more interesting, I wanted to give it a whirl on my flat-bar do-everything rig, the Hudski Doggler. The Doggler is a bit outside the intended gravel category, but as a modern hybrid, it is a great test bed for outlier situations where the Invert could be utilised.

Overview

What is it:

Simply put, the Invert is a suspension fork. But rather than making a smaller mountain bike fork, Cane Creek set out to design a fork explicitly made for gravel, delivering a smooth and controlled ride while complementing teh dropbar silhouette with a lightweight and visually striking design.

Inverted forks (also called upside-down forks) have been used on and off in the mountain bike world. Cane Creek says it opted for this design as it allowed for the lightest weight and most visually integrated design possible. The inverted design further reduces unsprung weight—the mass of parts like the wheel and lower fork that move with the terrain—making the suspension more responsive and improving traction. It's also said to keep seals better lubricated and cleaner, while the bridge-free design allows for better tyre clearance.

The Cane Creek Invert SL details:

• 30mm of travel
• Airsping Suspension
• Air pressure adjustable with shock pump
• Carbon fibre and aluminium construction
• Weight: 990g
• $1099,99

"Until this point, no fork made for drop bars, rigid or otherwise can offer this much rider benefit in one, clean package. This is what it means to truly be a Gravel Fork.," Cane Creek claims.

Let's dive in.

Unboxing and setup

With the Invert, Cane Creek set out to create the best-looking gravel-specific suspension fork—and that intention is clear the moment you open the box. This is a truly beautiful piece of kit. I’ll admit, I’ve got a soft spot for Cane Creek. The EEWings are some of my favourite cranks, the DBIL and Kitsuma shocks have found their way onto several of my bikes, and I regularly put their Helm Mkii fork through its paces. In short, I know the brand well and came into this review with high expectations for their take on a gravel fork.

The Invert is offered in two slightly different options. The SL, which weighs 990g, offers 30mm travel and measures 425mm axlet-to-crown. And the CS (Climb Switch), which weighs 1113, offers 40mm travel and measures 435mm ATC. Cane Creek set me up with the SL version, as the shorter travel worked better for my geometry.

The SL has a carbon fibre crown and tapered steerer tube, which are bonded to aluminium uppers to achieve a balance of weight savings and stiffness. Cane Creek has designed a crown race (36º) directly into the uppers and provides a perfectly matched IS52 bearing to help make sure you’re dialled. You can also fit the fork with ZS56 or EC44 headset, but you’ll need to check the angle of the bearing race. If you’re not able to check your headset angle, you’ll want to snag a lower headset from Cane Creek before you start assembling. The box includes a slick Ancora expansion plug and it's too bad one will never see the brilliant gold anodising once installed. The steerer is quite long, with plenty of room to accommodate a wide range of head tube sizes.

Unlike other mountain bike derivative forks, the Invert doesn’t include a damper—its suspension is handled entirely by the air spring. That kind of blew my mind. I’m used to constantly fiddling with knobs, always second-guessing whether my settings are dialled in. With the Invert, there’s none of that.

Cane Creek actually ran a blind side-by-side test, letting riders try the air spring version back-to-back with one that had a damper. The result? Most couldn’t feel enough of a difference to justify the added weight, complexity, and maintenance that a damper brings.

Of course, the air spring still needs regular servicing, but it's far simpler than bleeding dampers and replacing a bunch of seals.

The fork has a stealthy flat mount that works with 160mm rotors, or 180 with a +20mm flat mount adaptor. Cane Creek includes hardware that fits perfectly for 160mm, but you might need additional hardware with the +20mm adaptor. There’s also a cap that covers the bolts, keeping them safe from dirt and deris, which is a nice touch,

One area where I struggled when it came to the Fox 32 and Rockshox Rudy suspension gravel fork was the lack of compatibility with 650b tyre options (-they are both marketed as 700c only). The issue is that 650b tyres tend to sit right at the height of the fork bridge, which is the narrowest point.

With the Invert, you have the same clearance the whole way up the fork. I tested the fork with 650x2” Maxxis Refuse and Ultradynamico MARS 650x2.2”, and both left plenty of clearance for mud.

While the Invert is designed around a 12x100 thru axle, I had no issues using my 15x100 hubs with a sleeve. There is plenty of room around the axle for the larger flanges.

Benefits

Here are the benefits of the Cane Creek Invert suspension gravel fork:

Comfort: This thing adds some serious forgiveness to your regular riding. It erases all the chatter and leaves you with less arm fatigue. Plus, it accomplishes this without compromising your hand and body positioning.

Confidence: In the moment when you’re too late in spotting an obstacle, and manoeuvring away is no longer possible, your only hope is to grab on tight and hope for the best. This is when the Invert has your back. It will save you from that shock, and, hopefully, offer some cushion for your equipment as well.

Looks: The Invert is a real head-turner. It has visual power, and the finish is stellar.

Easily adjustable: I love the air spring's tunability. You can adjust it based on the rider's weight and the conditions and terrain you’re riding by simply adding or removing some PSIs.

Climb Switch: While I am on the SL version, the Climb Switch feature on the CS version allows one to lock out the fork to make it rigid. This sounds like the perfect option for folks who like to get out of the saddle to climb or sprint. The switch is close to the bars and easy to engage.

Limitation

While the Invert offers some enticing benefits, there are some limitations:

Cable/Hose Routing: The Inverted layout has some inherent limitations, with cable routing being my biggest gripe. Cane Creek has included some clever mounting bits, but more refinement is needed.

The current solution consists of a removable brake hose sleeve that holds the hose in place inside the fork's hose guide by friction only. But as you make use of the full 30mm of travel, the brake hose also moves that same distance. Over time, that hose sleeve tends to work its way loose. Once it works its way all the way out, your hose might start rubbing on your tyre. Rubbing alone wouldn't be so bad, but worst case scenario, it could get hung up on some side knobs, which could result in a torn hose or a crash. Both are less than ideal scenarios on gravel rides deep in the middle of nowhere. When this happened to me, I was able to remedy the situation with some zip ties.

Fortunately, Cane Creek is aware of this issue and they're working on a fix, stating:

We've definitely seen this before on several occasions, but right now it doesn't seem to be happening with enough frequency to be a massive concern. Our pro test riders have logged hundreds of hours and haven't reported this, but I have personally seen it once or twice. It seems to have something to do with brake hose length and the relative taughtness/orientation of the cable. Perhaps you just got unlucky with the way the brake hose lays in the guide on your particular bike. I'm glad you found a way to remedy it for yourself, but we really don't want riders to have to take these extra steps and our goal is absolutely that this rubber insert piece should be able to function 100% on its own.

Anyhow, we're always taking feedback and incorporating updates into our products. We'll keep a close eye on this and if a large number of riders keep reporting the same thing, we'll move on it quickly! I appreciate your feedback.

- Will Hart from Cane Creek

Cable noise: Cane Creek has included some tasteful touches to battle cable rubbing issues. There is a built-in rubber pad where the hose meets the left fork blade. This will help keep the noise down and prevent any rubbing. When things get really rough, you’ll still hear the hose smacking against the front of the fork leg. I think you could get this down to a minimum if you observe where the hose is hitting most frequently and tape on some foam around the hose at that spot.

Lack of fenders: Another oversight I’d like to mention is the lack of fender options. I live in the Pacific Northwest, where fenders are an essential bit of kit. They usually come out in October and stay on until May. If you’re a fairweather rider, this won’t be an issue, but I love riding in all conditions, so this is a bit of a dealbreaker for me, especially when the Fox32TC and Rockshox Rudy forks offer mounts for full fenders.

Geometry & Fit:

The ATC measurements on the current crop of suspension gravel forks are all above 420mm, which alters your bike's geometry.

Cane Creek Invert: 30mm = 425mm / 40mm = 435mm
Fox 32 TC: 40mm = 435.5 / 50mm = 445.5mm
Rockshox Rudy: 30mm = 425mm / 40mm = 435mm
MRP Baxter: 40mm = 430mm / 60mm = 456mm

Many gravel bikes are still designed with rigid fork lengths under 400mm (for example, my Nukeproof is designed around a 395mm fork with 48mm offset). Adding the Invert fork makes the difference in the geometry tangible. One could adjust for this by changing the stem and saddle position, but finding the sweet spot takes some playing around.

In the mountain bike world, a 10-20mm ATC change warrants a whole new category of bike. The gravel category will need to start figuring out how to design frames around the longer ATC required for suspension forks. The added length up front affects steering considerably, and the changes to the bottom bracket height and position are also noticeable in power output and ride feel.

While it might not affect your fit, it is good to know up front that it may change the way your bike rides (good or bad!)

Aggressive riding: While the lack of damper helps keep the weight down, it comes at a cost. If you’ve ever ridden your mountain bike with the rebound fully open and enjoyed the feeling of rapid return, you might love this feeling. But if you’re used to a more composed rebound tune and tamer return, this might take some getting used to. If you’re an aggressive rider who likes to pop off every bump, it will take some getting used to. It’s reminiscent of a high-volume tyre without that scary sidewall folding feeling.

When I set up the airspring based on the guide, it felt a bit too easy to bottom out. The setup chart calls for 176 psi for my 185 lb weight, but I ended up settling on 201 psi to keep it from bottoming out too easily.

Riding the Invert

Despite its limitations, the Invert does a great job of making gravel riding noticeably more comfortable. It also makes riding on city streets, smooth pathways and cement trails more enjoyable. But push it beyond that, and you’ll quickly find its limits—which is expected given the 30mm of travel and lack of damping.

The Cane Creek Invert as a gravel fork

Cane Creek was right in calling this a purebred gravel fork. It shines when putting in long miles over mixed surfaces. It really works, and I am a little bummed I didn’t get to try out the climb switch, as I bet that really elevates the experience when getting out of the saddle. Still, I never felt like I was wasting energy to the fork's movements.

The fork really comes into its own when carrying a good pace over flats, and when descending. It erases most of the hard impacts you get when an unsuspected bump sneaks up on you.

As a all terrain fork

If you’re looking to push this much further past champagne gravel roads, you may run into some limitations. If you’re a rider who likes to push your bike into compressions and pop off trail obstacles, you’ll need to get used to the unique sensation of the undamped air spring. The best way I can describe it is like adding a second, low-pressure tyre to your setup—but without the squirmy sidewall fold you typically get when running lower pressures. This design lets you run your actual tyres at slightly higher pressures, which improves rolling speed and eliminates that awkward compressing-sidewall feeling. The result is a front end that tracks with surprising confidence, all things considered.

My biggest gripe is with how the rebound feels without dampening. It is fast and that pogostick feel makes things a bit sketchy when you’re navigating rougher terrain or pushing the bike over wet rocks or roots. This winter and spring has been real wet in the Pacific Northwest, which has led to all sorts of unfavourable conditions and great opportunities to push the fork out of its comfort zone.

To really put the fork through its paces, I mounted it on my Hudski Doggler and squeezed in a pair of Ultradynamico Mars 27x2.25 Robustos. Their tread strikes a nice balance between gravel and XC, giving you the confidence to get into all kinds of shenanigans. The slightly rounder profile also helps with clearance in tighter spots.

With high-volume tyres and more aggressive riding in mind, dialling in air pressure became crucial. I settled on 23 PSI in the tyres and 195 PSI in the fork. It still bottomed out more than I’d like, but it felt supportive and predictable enough to live with.

I wasn’t thrilled with how the fork handled big compressions or jumps with steep lips—the fast rebound became more noticeable, especially on the longer Doggler chassis. Still, I had a blast testing its limits on a flat-bar hybrid, even if I wouldn’t recommend this setup for everyday use.

To Cane Creek’s credit, Will warned me this wasn’t the intended use case. Which, honestly, just strengthens their claim that this is the first true gravel fork.

Verdict

Where this fork shines

Road miles: Erases all the occasional bumps.

Gravel: High-frequency chatter is no match for the 30mm of travel.

Commuting: It makes little road imperfections disappear.

Smooth dirt: Enough suspension to push harder.

Where this fork lacks

Rougher Singletrack: Undamped rebound can be a bit unpredictable.

Wet Conditions: Lack of fender mounts means you’ll be coming home with a face full of road spray and mud.

Aggressive Riding: An interesting mix between the thwack of bottom out and unpredictability of rebound

Who is this bike for?

I think the ideal candidate for the Cane Creek Invert is someone who spends the majority of their miles on gravel roads and is looking for a way to increase comfort and confidence to help them go further and ride longer.

If you’re looking for a fork that could turn your gravel bike into a mini mountain bike, you may want to stick to other offerings (ie, the Fox 32 TC or Rockshox Rudy) that use a more traditional layout with both air spring and dampening.

Verdict:

The Cane Creek Invert is a simple, albeit extravagant, upgrade to your gravel bike that will boost comfort and confidence on your gravel rides. The title of gravel fork is well-earned, but things can get unpredictable when the fork is pushed outside the realm of the current gravel trend. In typical Cane Creek fashion, the design and finish on the fork are beautiful.

Value

The Invert comes in at a whopping $1,199.99 retail. If your goal is to open up more terrain possibilities, you might be better off getting a cheap hardtail. If your goal is to get a good-looking piece of kit that will make your gravel rides more enjoyable, then this might be the ticket.

However, at this price and the fork's simplicity, I would like to see more than a two-year warranty.

To sweeten the deal, though, Cane Creek is currently offering a $250 credit if you send in your current fork in exchange for the Invert.

These shoes bear a remarkable resemblance to Fizik’s higher-tier Tempo Decos Carbon model. To all intents and purposes this is a cut-price version of the same shoe, so I’ll be exploring the key differences to help you decide which is the best buy for you.

A quick note about my own feet. I’ve been blessed with large – size 48 – feet that, depending on the brand, fall between regular and wide. With many brands, including Fizik, I’m comfortable in both regular and wide fittings but I tend to prefer wide for long, summer rides as my feet can swell in the heat.

Construction

The two primary differences between the Omna and the Decos are the outsole material, and the fabric used to construct the upper. Sizing appears to be the same - I cannot feel much difference in terms of fit or volume, and both shoes use identical insoles. Somewhat counterintuitively, the less stiff Omna falls within Fizik’s Vento racing line, while the Tempo Decos is marketed as a performance endurance shoe. I’d say the Omna is a comfortable all-rounder, so ignore Fizik’s marketing on this one.

The Omna features Fizik’s R5 nylon outsole, which the brand gives a stiffness rating of 6/10. Grabbing the shoe at heel and toe, I can easily flex the sole a few millimetres in my hands, though I found it very resistant to twisting. Movement was most evident at the centre and ends of the shoe, with the metatarsal area – where the cleat holes are – remaining reassuringly rigid.

Basic physics dictates that longer shoes, like my size 48s, will probably exhibit more flex than smaller sizes, so experiences will vary. By contrast, the super-stiff 10/10 carbon sole found on the Decos is impossible to budge by hand in any direction.

Venting is fairly basic, there’s a single, small port beneath the metatarsophalangeal joint (big toe joint) that feeds directly into the toe box. Unlike the Decos, there’s no channelled exhaust port.

Two, soft, rubberised tread blocks, one at the heel, the other at the toe, provide grip for short walks. It’s a shame the toe block doesn’t wrap around the front to form a modest protective bumper to save scuffing during toe-down moments. The Decos has this feature, and I miss it here.

In common with many lower-priced shoes, the three-bolt cleat position is fixed as opposed to being adjustable for fore and aft fine-tuning. I guess this is to differentiate it from the more expensive Decos, which is a shame because I hesitate to consider £164.99/$169.99 as entry-level. Fortunately, your cleats – Shimano or Look Keo – will allow some adjustment, and Fizik has placed the bolt holes in this relatively new shoe further back than used to be the norm. So, obtaining enough set-back for a comfortable, powerful pedal stroke shouldn’t be a problem.

The upper is made from fabric-backed, high-density polyurethane, which has a subtle faux-leather grain. It’s quite thick, but very soft and pliable. The tongue uses a heavier-weight, thicker, cushion-backed polyurethane that features an industrial-style diamond grid pattern and a generous number of perforations to aid breathability.

In contrast, the Decos’ upper is much lighter, made from a fine mesh that’s laminated with a very thin layer of polyurethane.

In keeping with Fizik’s signature aesthetic, this shoe has extremely clean lines with minimal stitching and no visible joins. The upper is made from a single piece of fabric with a dozen or so diagonal rows of perforations throughout the mid-foot.

The fabric cuff is soft and deep – externally, it’s significantly more prominent than the very subtle cuff on the Decos, but internally they are near identical.

Both shoes have a very similar closure system that comprises a single, side-mounted Boa that equally tensions both sides of a traditional central lace channel (slightly offset on the Decos). There are no fancy burrito-style wrap-over shenanigans in evidence here, and I believe both shoes are all the better for it. This is a simple shoe, with a simple, attractive aesthetic. Why complicate things?

The only obvious difference with the lacing is that the Omna uses fabric lace guides versus the plastic guides on the Decos. Arguably, fabric is better because it’s even less likely to bite into the foot, but the cable laces may not run as freely.

Just like its pricier cousin, the Omna benefits from premium, low-profile, micro-adjust Li2 Boas, which can both tighten and loosen on the fly. An impressive feature to find at this price point.

Claimed weight for the Omnas, size unspecified, is 240g per shoe, which is only 22g heavier than the claimed weight for the Decos. Actual weight for my size 48 Decos is 307g per shoe versus 346g for my Omnas, a 39g saving.

The Ride

The best way to ensure a shoe is going to fit correctly is to try a pair at your local stockist, rarely an option these days because many of us, for better or worse, purchase online. This was my experience too; the review pair was delivered by post.

Fortunately, Fizik provides a decent shoe fit chart on its website, together with detailed instructions for measuring your feet. For example, Fizik maintains that if your feet measure 270mm in length, then you’re a size 8 UK, 42 EU and 9 US. If your metatarsal width is less than 105mm then a regular size should be most suitable. If you measure up bigger, then opt for a wide fitting.

Fizik also says on its website that its wide fitting offers ‘slightly more generous sizing’, which I believe sums up its broader offering perfectly. Neither the Omna nor the Decos are built for extremes, it’s a matter of degree.

As a wholly unscientific test, I offered up an insole from a regular fit Fizik Mechanism PNS race shoe against the Omna wide, both size 48. At the metatarsal area, the Omna provided another 7mm of room at the widest point. I also compared the more leisure-oriented Fizik Tempo Beat and found barely any difference, perhaps a millimetre. This is, of course, size-dependent but it’s a useful comparison. Essentially, if you find Fizik race shoes a little too snug then the wide fitting will feel a little less so.

The wide-fitting Omnas and Decos feel much the same in terms of width and volume. Fizik doesn’t appear to have increased the heel cup widths much, if at all, so the back of my foot felt securely locked in wearing either shoe. If anything, the Omna felt like it had more volume, but the difference was so slight, this could just be my mind playing tricks on me. As expected, both shoes are measurably wider at the forefoot than the Mechanism PNS, but the heel cup feel isn’t dissimilar.

Stiffness is, of course, a different story. The nylon sole is more flexible, which is especially noticeable when doing the penguin walk to a café table. On the bike, the difference is undeniably there, but the cleat platform remains plenty stiff enough for it not to be a concern.

There is a trade-off here. Yes, it’s possible that a slightly less stiff shoe will hinder power transfer – the jury is still out on this one – but it will also better conform to the foot, minimising the likelihood of heel lift and reducing the risk of painful blisters. During my rides, I wasn’t troubled by a lack of torsional or lateral stiffness, whether cruising the distance, putting the hammer down or enjoying short, sharp but fun town sign sprints.

Remember, it’s not all about sole stiffness. The secure heel cup, excellent lace tensioning system and ‘stiff enough’ sole work in combination to provide the best footing for a comfortable, efficient ride.

I tested the Omna Wide throughout the early spring, when we were blessed with dry, sunny but chilly weather conditions in the UK. The mercury rarely rose above 15°C/60°C, with early morning lows down to 2°C/35°F. These shoes, with their relatively thick uppers, peppered with a modest number of perforations, kept my feet comfortable in the mid-to-upper temperature range but I’m concerned that they’re going to be a little warm for hot summers.

Value and Conclusions

There are lighter, stiffer, more vented shoes on the market – the Fizik Tempo Decos for a start – but you’ll have to pay top dollar for them. There are also plenty of budget shoes with nylon soles, but very few are available in a wide fitting. So, though I’d love the Omna Wides to be cheaper, I must concede that Fizik has pitched the price about right.

They have some worthy competition. Shimano’s SH-RC502 Wide is a single Boa shoe, with a carbon-reinforced midsole and adjustable cleat holes, retailing for £139/$170. The CX177 Wide from Lake, a brand with an enviable reputation for wide-fitting shoes, is another similarly specced single Boa shoe priced at £150/$179. Other brands, such as Bont and Specialized, do offer shoes with a wider fit, but not at this price point.

The Fizik Omna Wide successfully offers a wider, higher volume solution that doesn’t deviate too much from a snug race fit. Stiffness is more than good enough, if anything the nylon soles add versatility that carbon-soled shoes will struggle to match. The price may be high, but so is the quality.

Specs

• Colours: Black or White
• Sizes: 36 to 48. Half sizes from 37.5 to 46.5
• Perforated high-density PU upper
• Li2 BOA® Dial C Fit System
• R5 nylon outsole: Stiffness index 6
• Weight: 240 g claimed

Made from a thin but tough waterproof material (without any harmful PFAs) and with taped and sealed seams, the Amager will have no problem keeping its contents dry. The kit on the inside that is. There are straps and loops on the outside to hold your helmet, two velcro loops for a lock and some fixed straps that you could hook smaller items too.

There’s enough space in the bag - 30 litres - to carry everything you need for a day at the office, and a removable padded laptop pocket that comfortably holds a 17-inch machine. The pocket itself has a couple of compartments on the front to hold pens, chargers, notepads or whatever. Take it out and you’ll have a little more space inside.

The roll top design allows you to expand the bag a little if it’s full to bursting, and clamp it down the required amount with the adjustable strap over the top.

There are two padded strips down the back of the bag for comfort, with a gap in between for a bit of airflow to keep your back cool. The padding in the shoulder straps also has some holes cut into it to allow for airflow.

Although they would make minimum difference. I tested my bag through the winter and could only dream of using it on hot sunny days, so while I can’t vouch for any cooling airflow, I can at least vouch for its comfort.

The bag has plenty of nice little features, including a magnet to hold the top together which makes it easier to roll up, and a velcro fastener on the adjustment strap so it can be neatly tucked away rather than have it flapping around. And there’s a stash pocket to hide the waist straps when you’re not using them.

The smaller chest strap slides up and down on a 14cm runner, giving good adjustability and next to it is a small loop to stash sunglasses.

The back of the bag is rigid so it holds its shape when sitting on the floor, which makes it easier to pack as you don’t have to hold the bag with one hand and pack with the other.

There’s one small zipped pocket at the bottom of the bag on the right-hand side, just big enough for a phone, wallet and keys. Those smaller items you might want to grab quickly.

The helmet straps would hold your lid a little more securely if they were elasticated and had a bit of grip. Not that it’s unsecure, it just needs some adjustment to get it just so.

But if you’re looking for something to double up as a day bag, then it might not be right for you. This is the one drawback of rolltop bags as the single opening at the top means it can be hard to find or get to items at the bottom. The worst case scenario is something at the top falling out of the bag as you’re rummaging for something lower down, as happened to me.

So when the Rudy Project Rebel road bike helmet arrived, I was immediately intrigued. It had vents—and lots of them—and it was also compact. Could this become my new riding buddy?

Construction

While Rudy Project may boast that the Rebel's core design is the Carbon Kevlar panels, ESP (Expanded Polystyrene) foam is at the heart of the helmet's construction. This isn't to say it's bad; ESP is doing the important work of protecting our heads in most helmets, because it excels at absorbing single, high-energy impacts by crushing and dissipating the force—perfect for a bike helmet.

Carbon Kevlar comes into play here, in the form of panels that enable the Rebel to be lightweight and highly ventilated, whilst also ensuring a high degree of structural reinforcement.

According to NIH, Carbon Kevlar "combines the properties of the two types of fibres, offering high levels of strength and stiffness, as well as high impact strength." This is an excellent combination in the manufacture of helmet shells.

Comparing vent numbers against the Smith Optics Trace MIPS, which racks up and impressive 18 vents, and the Rapha + POC Ventral Lite helmets, with 20 vents, the Rudy Project Rebel scores even higher, with 22 vents and six internal airflow channels.

However, when it comes to weight, the Rebel is by far the heaviest of the three, at 266g for a size small/medium. This is less than 30g lighter than the Smith Optics Trace MIPS, at 294g, but nearly 100g more than the Rapha + POC Ventral Lite, at 170g.

The Smith, has the MIPS safety system, a feature that always adds weight to a helmet, while the Rebel does not. So to find this is heavier, is a surprise.

Instead of MIPS, which is designed to protect the brain from rotational forces, Rudy Project has chosen an alternative construction method, which, according to the brand, means the Rebel meets regular helmet safety requirements with CE EN 1078 certification, and does also pass the RP Rotational Impact Test. Rudy Project claims that this advanced test protocol uses the BrIC index, which in this helmet, minimises the risk of brain injuries from rotational impacts sufficiently.

Rudy Project also says that in this design, they've combined their Fid Lock magnetic closure with what they refer to as their RSRMicro11 retention system, making sure the helmet stays put, safe and secure where it should be in case of an accident.

Elsewhere, the brand has also aimed to enhance rider comfort. The helmet strap includes an Ergo Divider under-ear adjustment system to ensure a stable fit and reduce strap flap at high speeds. Front eyewear docking ports are also included for ease of glasses storage.

The Ride

In terms of fit and overall performance, this is a great helmet; the weight whilst not as low as alternatives doesn't matter much as it is hardly noticeable, and I'm sure I will appreciate the ample and welcome ventilation in warmer UK temperatures. Likewise, whilst the supplied insect net isn't really needed this early in the season, and I might prefer to remove it so I can scratch my head a little more easily at this time of year, I would imagine I'll be very grateful for it during peak bug season!

Here at Cycling Weekly, we don't have a wind tunnel and no way of performing destructive testing, short of falling off, which is a length I'm not prepared to go to for the lovely readers of CW, so we'll need to take Rudy Projects' claims on both at face value, though it's noted that the tests they have performed have been independently verified.

Despite crossing two sizes, this helmet didn't feel excessively large on my head. It's easy to wear a skull hat underneath for cooler weather, and I find the rear retention system easy to tighten or loosen on the move.

However, the big issue with the fit is the straps, which make me feel somewhat self-conscious when wearing the Rebel. While I can ensure a close and secure fit under my chin, I can't shorten the side straps, and the Ergo Divider under-ear adjustment system sits on my jaw.

And, I'm not the only one who will suffer from this issue. For robustness, I asked my other half, who has a larger and longer head to try on the helmet. Still, the Ergo Divider sits too low. Having checked and re-checked, the straps appear to have only one point of adjustment to shorten the straps. The forward and aft options that are there on the Ergo Divider also don't let me take up any of the excess slack in the strap.

I was concerned enough that I referred the issue to the Rudy Project team. I explained the issue I'd encountered, and asked whether or not the issue could impact the helmet's safety or performance. I'm yet to hear back, but as soon as I do, I'll update this review.

I also found the Fid Lock closure system difficult to use. After weeks with the helmet, I still can't connect the strap under my chin without my ten-year-old's help. The thought of removing the helmet during a café stop or after a ride triggers mild claustrophobia. I recognise that there's probably impressive engineering involved in this helmet, but if it means I can't be confident fitting the helmet on my own, then I question its benefits. The commonly used clip systems used in most other helmet designs work better. So I'm baffled as to how or why they've gone their own way, if it doesn't improve things.

Value and conclusion

In a helmet market full of aero hard shells, it's great to see Rudy Project bring an alternative to market. Weight-wise compared to its peers it could be lighter, but it's barely noticeable on your head, it has ample ventilation and still provides a comfortable ride.

I appreciate the brand's attempt to go its own way, designing some – on paper –pretty neat homegrown features, but I'm not entirely clear on what these contribute. The limited strap length adjustability is a real chore, especially when the price point places the Rebel in direct competition with very accomplished set ups like the Smith Optics Trace MIPS and Rapha + POC Ventral Lite. The former offers the gold standard of helmet safety features, while the latter is lighter.

There's still a lot going for Rebel, and there's no strong reason not to buy it, especially if like me you prefer this style of helmet, but in my view it doesn't stand out sufficiently to make real waves, especially at the £270 / $TBC price point

Specs

• Safety Features: CE EN 1078 certification and a pass in the RP Rotational Impact Test.
• Sizes: S/M, L
• Colours: Black, White, Red
• Weights: 250g for S/M

The move to disc brakes on road bikes has allowed not only the use of wider, faster tyres but also wider rims, which better accommodate the bigger tyres. Scribe has been quick to adopt these new standards and produces a range of alloy and carbon rims with thoroughly modern dimensions at very reasonable prices.

Scribe offers three levels of carbon road wheels, the range-topping Elan, mid-level Core and less expensive Inception. The Elan and Core each feature 40, 50 and 60mm rims, whilst the Inception is only available in 50mm depth. All rims and hubs are proprietary and are designed and assembled in Belfast.

Construction

We chose to review the new, sub £1,000 model in 50mm depth as they offer an enticing blend of aero, low weight and affordability.

I weighed the pair at 1,376g, 33g more than Scribe’s claimed weight, but as my wheels had tubeless rim tape in place, that seemed fair enough. This is a fantastic weight for the price, but even more so when you consider that Scribe hasn’t scrimped on the rim’s size. The front wheel has an internal width of 24mm, whilst the rear is 21mm, making them better for use with wider tyres.

The T1000 carbon rims are tubeless and hooked, so they can be used with a very wide variety of tyres, including tube-type. Scribe suggests that the rims are ideal for 28-30mm rubber but that anything up to 40mm will be fine. The toroidal, blunt U shape of the rims, as used by nearly all wheel manufacturers now, promises good aerodynamics and decent crosswind stability even at 50mm deep.

Ratchet hubs, in either 36 or 54 tooth or flavours, are available with the higher tooth count giving slightly faster engagement, but to keep the cost below £1,000, we stayed with the standard hub option. Typically, ratchet hubs are a bit more durable than pawl systems as the load is spread over a much greater surface area as there are far more contact points between the two elements compared with pawl freehubs. It’s nice to see the steel reinforcement spline on the freehub, which should prevent the cassette’s sprockets from biting into the soft aluminium.

There are no corners cut when it comes to spokes either, as the Core Superlight wheels are supplied with the industry gold standard straight-pull Sapim CX-Ray spokes and Sapim Secure Lock square head nipples.

The ride

The Scribes are a smart-looking wheelset. The gloss black graphics look great against the carbon rim, and when lifted out of the box, the low weight was striking.

Fitting some 28mm Hutchinson Blackbird tyres was very straightforward, although even with a ramped rim bed, I had to over-inflate to get them to pop evenly up onto the rim. Cassette on and rotors attached, the wheels were ready for business.

At 50mm deep and weighing less than 1,400g, I hoped for great things from the Core 50s, and I wasn’t disappointed. Climbs and descents were despatched with equal aplomb; there was plenty of encouragement for pushing on the pedals as each effort was transferred to the tarmac seemingly undiminished. Where I ride, there are plenty of climbs on every ride, ranging from 5km drags to 25% kicks, so low weight and efficiency are always something to be thankful for, but there are some flatter roads too. The Scribe Core SL+ 50 deeper stablemate, the Core SL 60, did very well recently in some independent wind tunnel tests, out-performing or matching some far more expensive products, and the Core 50s felt lovely at full speed as well. Of course, the 50s won’t be quite as slippery as the 60s, but the results indicate that Scribe has done a great job with their rim shapes.

From my experience, the Core SL+ 50 hits a very desirable sweet spot between the momentum-holding abilities of heavier, deeper wheels and the responsiveness of very light, shallower rims. On the poor roads of the Peak District, the wheels' speed will have also been greatly helped by the wide rims, allowing the tyres to spread and provide a smoother passage over the bumps and irregularities of the tarmac. The 28mm Blackbirds actually measured 29.5mm on the wider front wheel.

Similarly, I used the Scribes with Pirelli P-Zero Race tyres in 30mm flavour, and this gave me nearly 32mm in width.

Despite the shock-absorbing properties of the tyres, I felt that the Core 50s were on the stiffer side of the spectrum, feeling quite direct and not at all ‘flimsy’, aided by the straight-pull spokes and excellent build. Stiff wheels and supple tyres are a great way to find some extra speed on poor road surfaces without sacrificing either comfort or performance.

I was also impressed with their behaviour in crosswinds. The weather seems to have been rather blustery of late, and I didn’t particularly enjoy a recent windy ride using Mavis Cosmic S 42s, but in similar conditions, the 50mm deep Scribes were easier to handle.

The wheels stayed true for the duration of the test, despite a puncture-inducing clatter into a pothole, but should the worst happen, then replacement Sapim spokes will be easy enough to source. I guess some riders won’t like the undeniably loud freehub, but having grown up with Hope hubs, I like the reassuring buzz. Otherwise, the Scribe Core SL+ 50 wheels are very impressive and enjoyable to ride.

Value and conclusion

It is hard to think of any downsides to the Scribes, especially when you consider that they cost less than £1,000. With some of the most expensive wheelsets costing over five times the price without any super obvious benefits (to amateurs anyway), they offer fantastic value for money. For the cost of one set of Princeton CarbonWorks wheels, for example, you could buy all three depths of Scribes and still have plenty of cash left for plenty of premium tyres. Furthermore, wheels are pretty vulnerable to damage, and although £1,000 isn’t pocket change, I think using even more expensive wheels might actually affect my riding for the worse, as I'd worry about damaging them. Scribe offers a free lifetime crash replacement service on carbon wheels, whereby crash-damaged parts can be replaced for a 50% discount.

With rear LED lights being lightweight and having little to no performance impact, the only barrier is the cost of yet another set of bike lights.

So could the Zefal Supervision R150 rear daytime and nighttime running lights be the answer?

Construction and features

When it comes to bike lights, the two most important elements to discuss are brightness and battery life between charges.

The Zefal Supervision R150, rear light boasts 150 lumens as the naming convention suggests. In context, the most potent front lights, such as the Exposure Strada MK12 RS AKTiv front light, state a 1450 lumen output, while the brightest rear lights often quote 300 or even 500 lumens. Although a deeper look at the numbers can reveal that the brightest function is reserved for integrated accelerometer-powered brake lights, so check that when you're comparing specifications back-to-back.

If you ignore that feature, a decent bright rear light's lumen range will be between 90 and 170 lumens on a high setting.

Lumens (lm) refer to something called, luminous flux, which is the total amount of visible light emitted by a light source. We don't use watts like we might with an old domestic lightbulb because as LED lights –like those found in all our bike lights these days, and most domestic settings – have got more efficient, they emit more light, for less power.

It's also important to remember that whilst it should be a simple case that the higher the number, the brighter the light, there is no standardisation for testing lumen output. For example, was the lumens test undertaken before or after the lens was added to the light? Manufacturers aren't obliged to tell you. So this means it's crucial not to make a decision based on the lumens claim alone.

Another important factor to consider regarding a light's lumen output is how long it maintains that brightness. The Supervision R150 rear light offers five operating modes: three constant (low, medium, and high), two flashing, and one automatic backup flash mode.

The product information claims that to gain the full 150 lumens, you need to select 'Flash 2 ' mode. According to Zefal, this should give you up to eight hours of run time. The brightest light available from this light, on a constant setting is 80 lumens. It will run at 80 lumens for three hours on a fully charged battery. The light will run for longer, at less lumens, with 'Low' mode delivering 15 lumens, or Flash 1 mode which delivers a very reasonable 50 lumens of light, for up to 16 hours!

However, when the battery capacity falls below 20%, the light automatically switches to 50-lumen flash mode.

I clarified this with the brand, and Zefal confirmed that it means, that after six and a half hours of running the Flash 2 mode, it will automatically switch to the 50-Lumen Flash mode.

The same goes for any of the light settings once the light hits the 20 percent battery life zone, unless you recharge.

When discussing light charging, it's important to note that Zefal has a quirk: none of the Supervision range of lights comes with a charging cable. Instead, they require you to already own a USB-C cable to charge the 1200mAh 3.7V Polymer battery.

We're going to be needing more of these cables at home, thanks to an EU standard, which came in December 2024, which dictates that all electronic devices of this type, including phones, laptops, speakers, must have a USB-C charge port. From Spring 2026 all laptops will need to be USB-C too.

That's welcome, sensible – possibly overdue – standardisation that should mean we have far fewer redundant cables laying around at home, but for now, do check you have a cable to charge this range of lights, and if you don't have one yet, you'll need to budget for buying one.

I'm conflicted about this policy, as in this case Zefal seems to have used the assumption that you have one at home, to get out of including one. Longer term I guess this means brands will be shipping less cables around the world to people that already have them, and that's a good thing, but not everyone is lucky enough to have one laying around like I was.

Providing 270° visibility, the LED light measures 78x47x28 millimeters and weighs 65 grams. When theoretically positioned next to the rear Raveman TR500, it is smaller by a few millimeters in every direction and weighs about 10 grams less.

My uncertainty about the exact dimensions stems from Zefal's ability to adjust its mounting positions. The Supervision R150 rear light features a no-tool silicone strap that fits any tube with a diameter between 15 and 36mm, or a clip that can be positioned almost anywhere and in any orientation, making it highly versatile.

Considering this, it’s important to remember that the light is waterproofed up to an IPX6 rating, which means it is protected against high-pressure water streams from any angle. This rating ensures that the light is safe from water ingress as long as the USB-C port is securely covered.

The ride

Fitting the Zefal Supervision R150 is a doddle. It was perfect for the Fara F/Gravel bike I'm riding at the moment, with its 27.5 mm seatpost. I grimaced at the idea of strapping the silicone straps around a dropper post, worrying that abrasive material would be trapped and score the piston. So, I opted instead to use the clip adaptor and try the light worn about my person.

However, it was so lightweight, I couldn't feel it sufficiently to feel content about it hanging off the rear pocket of the loose-fitting Santini Alpha Pack Vest, and I found myself constantly checking it was still there. That reads like a backhanded compliment for the Supervision's barely-there weight penalty, but, it is something to consider if you are selecting based on the clip mount, eg, if you have an aero seatpost.

When it comes to light output, I found the constant light on high to be the best option. I would have liked to use the flash setting, but I felt that the 'off' element was just too long. I personally believe that any flash setting on a bike should be a brighter flash or strobe so that you are never plunged into total blackout.

Even a single second 'off' is enough to make you invisible to a car. If it is driving at thirty miles per hour (48 kph), the national speed limit for most built-up areas in England, a car will travel 44 feet (13 meters) in one second, and, according to the Automobile Association, take 75 feet (23 meters) to come to a stop.

France has banned rear flashing lights altogether. Although the reasoning is more car-centric (flashing lights could dazzle and distract drivers), I’m curious to see the next iteration of lights from the brand now that this law is in place in its home country.

Value and conclusion

With much of my thoughts focused on the perils of the Zefal Supervision R150 flash setting, you would be forgiven for thinking I didn't like the light.

On the contrary, I think it's a great option for anyone wanting a robust rear light. Its design allows for excellent side visibility for the rider and a clear view from behind.

It's a breeze to fit and charge, assuming you have a charger, and the simple mode cycle button is easy to operate even when wearing thick gloves.

Focusing on all these positive aspects, and then factoring in the price of £35.99/ $48 and, it's bang in the middle of other similar functioning lights such as the Knog Mid Cobber a great option for many cyclists.

I believe it offers sufficient illumination to function as both a daytime and nighttime rear light, but the one issue I have is that the flash setting is just too slow.

Originally an off-road company, WTB doesn’t produce any pure road tyres so these are about as roadie as their range goes.

For this review, I tested both widths of the tubeless-ready Exposure, the 36mm and the 30mm. The 36mm tyres arrived fitted to the ENVE Fray that we used for the Gravel v Allroad article, and I put a few miles in on them, but as 36mm is a bit extreme for allroad and wouldn’t fit in some frames, we switched them out for the narrower version. This was also done in part because on the ENVE 3.4 SES wheels, the 25mm inner rim width caused the 36mm tyres to swell up to measure 39mm, which is definitely into gravel bike territory rather than road; even the 30mm was 33mm when fitted.

Construction

As well as two widths (36mm and 30mm), the tubeless Exposure is available with black sidewalls featuring SG2 puncture protection or tan sidewalls without the protection, which is a bit lighter. Both versions have WTB Dual DNA rubber.

I tested the tan wall option without the extra sidewall puncture protection, which gives the tyres claimed weights of 403g (36mm) and 314g (30mm). I weighed the samples at 382g and 330g, respectively, so not too far out. The tan sidewalls certainly felt very supple in the hand without the puncture protection.

Dual DNA construction means that there are two rubber compounds: a harder, more durable central area for longevity and low rolling resistance with a softer, grippier rubber on the shoulders for more assured cornering. The shoulder rubber is also very slightly textured, although I can’t imagine that it actually increases traction by much.

The suggested minimum and maximum pressures for the tyres are 35-65psi for the 30mm and 30-55psi for the 36mm, which are quite low, so keep an eye on your pressure gauge.

The ride

Although the 36s arrived already installed, when I replaced them with the 30s, it was without any great trouble. They slotted onto the rims fairly easily and then inflated just as quickly. Air retention has been OK, but a few pumps of air before each ride (as is very often the case with tubeless) has been the norm with both widths of the tyre using WTB’s own sealant.

It was certainly slightly odd riding a road bike and looking down to see a 39mm expanse of rubber ballooning out in front, although there is no denying the comfort and peace of mind it gave on poor road surfaces. A bit like riding a gravel bike on tarmac, I simply didn’t have to worry about avoiding cracks and potholes. I even ventured off-road on it, and along smooth but unsurfaced trails, it was fine, albeit lacking a bit in stopping power.

However, at 400g and 39mm, it was never going to be the quickest road-going option, so I was happy to swap it for some more appropriate rubber before a week’s riding in Spain. At a measured 33mm, the 30mm tyre was a great all-round option; still with plenty of supple cushioning but a bit lighter and better handling.

The eastern area of Spain around Calp and Denia has become a favourite training ground for pros, so I was never going to trouble the top ten (or top 100) on the famous climbs whether on ‘fast adventure’ road tyres or not, I also didn’t feel held back by them either - they didn’t sap energy or the will to live in the way that some tyres can. I posted similar times up climbs that I had done on previous trips (2.5km still to go for me on Coll de Rates when Tadej Pogačar would have finished!). Again, the volume and sturdiness of the tyre were great when taking some less-than-perfect service roads or cutting between the almond groves on their cracked concrete tracks.

The combination of wide-yet-supple tyres on the ENVE Fray made for relaxed riding, assured descending and provided perfectly reasonable climbing speed, although don’t forget that the SG2 puncture protection option would add weight and very likely reduce the suppleness.

There are lots of potential users for this tyre thanks to its worthwhile combination of very reasonable speed and durability; Trans-continental adventurers might be WTB’s headline market, but commuters, weekend bikepackers and country lane explorers would all do well to consider it. The 36mm would also be perfect on a second set of wheels to convert a gravel bike into a road machine.

Of course, there are lighter, faster tyres - don’t expect to see them on the WorldTour anytime soon - but for the rest of us, they are an interesting option.

Value and conclusion

The fatter version was good on local rides around the Peak, with poor tarmac and plenty of potholes, whilst the 30mm option is a great general-purpose tyre. The prices are on the premium side at £70/$69.95 for the SG2 version and £60/$65.95 for the as-tested non-SG2 model, but longevity and ride quality should offset that in part at least.

Ultimately, I won’t be replacing my Pirelli P-Zero Races on my best bike with the Exposures, but if I commuted or was heading off on a road-biased bikepacking trip, then the WTB Exposures would be the perfect tyre.

I’ve been on a quest for a decent pair of waterproof cycling pants for ages. I know, I know—rain pants are supposedly for commuters, mountain bikers, and those doing recon laps on a muddy cyclocross course. But hear me out: when it’s pouring like a broken fire hydrant and your fenders are redirecting road spray straight onto your shins, lycra –even the insulated kind– offers little in the way of protection. Sometimes, I just want that extra layer against the elements. And yes, I’ve tried several of those high-tech bib tights with their fancy coatings promising some protection. But none of them are truly waterproof. They end up soaking through and then cling to the moisture like a sponge. (If you have discovered the Holy Grail of waterproof tights, drop it in the comments below.)

So, pants it is. But the ones that actually keep you dry are usually either too warm for anything faster than a commuter pace or too baggy—loudly flapping around in the wind and risking a disastrous tangle with the drivetrain. I continued my quest this winter, and so far, the Gorewear Endure GORE-TEX pants are the best contenders. They’re still not as comfortable as bib tights, but they’ve definitely earned their place in my rainy-day survival kit.

Gorewear Endure GORE-TEX Pants - Details

• Hero material: GORE-TEX PACLITE® PLUS-Technology
• Adjustable waistband with drawcord
• Silicone gripper on the back waistband
• Abrasion-resistant seat panel
• Waterproof side zip pocket
• Ankle zipper for easy on and off
• Snap buttons to ankle width
• Reflective details
• Packs into its own pocket
• Weight: 172 grams
• Price: Was $260, on sale for $150

On the road/trail

I am a longtime fan of GOREWEAR products. When it comes to rainwear, it’s truly some of the best stuff on the market. Sadly, the best products – like my beloved Shakedry jacket– contain PFAS materials and are being replaced with more environmentally friendly products. These pants, made with GORE-TEX Paclite Plus material, are among them. But if you’re not in California or New York and you can get these pants shipped to you, now’s the time to do it. They’re already made, after all. The eco-friendly thing to do for Planet Earth now is to use them, maintain them and keep them from going into landfill.

Gorewear is replacing the Endure pants with the Lupra GORE-TEX Pants, which are exactly the same in terms of style and fit but feature the new ePE membrane, which is PFAS-free.

As far as I can tell, these pants are an evolution of the former Paclite pants, which were pretty popular and for good reason. The Endure pants are marketing as being lightweight, robust and breathable thanks to the 2.5-layer GORE-TEX Paclite Plus material. They’re also durably waterproof, totally windproof and packable. So packable, in fact, that they can be stowed into their own side pocket and tossed in your handlebar bag for when the weather turns; they weigh just 172 grams and take up little more space than an iPhone.

The pants fit loosely but not overly baggy. They’re not quite a jogger fit like 7Mesh Glidepath pants but the ankle features a zipper closure behind a storm flap as well as two different snap buttons allowing you to adjust the hem width around the ankle. They’re certainly not going to get in the way of your drivetrain but they do rustle a little in the wind. The looseness does make them super easy to pull on and off if you’re on the go.

The pre-shaped knee and hip areas allow for freedom of movement while riding. The soft waistband with a drawcord provides an adjustable fit—much better than the standard elastic bands, which are somehow always either too loose or muffin-top-inducing.

The pants are breathable enough so that you’re not being hot-boxed, but even on the coldest days, they were warm enough that I wore non-insulated tights underneath. Thermal tights would be overkill if you’re getting anywhere above a Zone 2 heart rate.

The Paclite material is excellent. Reliable waterproofing and thus far, quite durable. The pants also feature a reinforced seat panel—a nice touch to prevent wear on the most abrasion-prone area. I feel like these pants would be equally at home on the road, during a commute, on the trail, or on a gravel ride. In other words: highly versatile.

Rather than having pockets at the waist, the pants feature just one zippered pocket, located on the outside of the thigh, which is easily accessible yet completely out of the way when riding. The pocket is also fully waterproof, so you can store your phone there worry-free.

I’ve worn these pants in a downpour, in hail, and in snow. On muddy trails and on filthy road rides. They’ve performed well every time, providing a barrier against the elements without overheating. When worn next to bare skin, they can get a little clammy, but if it’s warm enough to wear shorts, then I probably wouldn’t reach for these anyway. These are for days when it’s barely above freezing and raining hard.

Ideally, these pants would have a slightly more form-fitting silhouette and perhaps a vent for faster rides, but in general, I’ve been quite happy with them.

Verdict

If you’re after a durable, lightweight and truly waterproof pair of pants that can handle everything from road rides to gravel grinders to muddy singletrack, the Gorewear Endure GORE-TEX pants are a solid pick. They pack down small, fit well enough and, most importantly, they do their job: keeping you dry. Sure, they’re not perfect but for the wettest outings, they’re the best I’ve found.

Sadly, the Paclite material does contain “forever chemicals” and are being phased out by GOREWEAR in favour of more environmentally sustainable options. So, if you can still get your hands on them, it’s worth it—especially since they’re on sale everywhere I’ve seen them.

To that end, one of the best technological advancements in cycling history is the development of photochromatic lenses, which allow light and dark riding with the same pair of glasses.

So when a pair of Rudy Project Spinshield Air cycling sunglasses promises swift lens adaptation and a light and secure fit suitable for multiple sports, could they signal the end of needing multi-lens and multiple-sport sunglasses?

Construction

The heart of any eye protection is the lens. Rudy Project has decided to invest in their brand-exclusive polycarbonate ImpactX.

According to Rudy Project, this lens is ideal for sporting use due to its semi-rigid and impact-resistant structure. This allows for a degree of flex in the lens, making it less vulnerable to the stresses and strains of sports use.

The ImpactX lens also promises to seamlessly adapt to changes in light. When paired with their polarized Polar 3FX, it eliminates reflections while providing complete UV protection. Rudy Project also states that the ImpactX lens offers incredibly high clarity compared to any other polycarbonate equivalent due to its minimal chromatic dispersion, surface reflection, and 'rainbow effect.’

It's a bold claim for a non-Zeiss lens, which most of the best cycling sunglasses use.

Regarding the photochromatic feature, Rudy Project indicates that with the lens colorway that I tested (Laserpurple), I should expect 48% light transmission when inactive. For instance, while riding in low light conditions, the lens will let in about half of the available light, but only 8% in the brightest conditions, when the lenses are fully active.

Rudy Project also states that another benefit of the ImpactX lens is that polycarbonate is thinner and lighter than its plastic equivalent (CR-39) lenses.

This, along with the Nylon frame, has enabled the SpinShield Air's wraparound half-frame design to be incredibly lightweight. My test pair weighed just 25 grams on the scales.

Putting this in the context of most top cycling sunglasses, that makes these lighter by about six grams. Oakley Encoders for example weigh 31 grams. We're dealing with very small numbers here, but that's 25% lighter.

Our current favourite photochromic sunglasses, the Oakley EV Zero Blades, weigh 29 grams. The Spinshield Air's are still 4g lighter than those.

Six grams, equivalent to a teaspoon of sugar, isn't substantial but plays a significant role when sports glasses need to withstand the demands of intense movement.

They're certainly lightweight and if you combine that with Rudy Project's claims of a comfortable and stable fit—thanks to their grippy and interchangeable nose pad, temple tip pads, and what they call face-hugging geometry— that makes the SpinShield Air a strong contender for multiple sports.

The biggest win for some athletes could be the integration of the Spinshield Air sunglasses with prescription lenses and inserts. The Optical Dock provides versatility through a clip-in solution, offering incredible options for riders who need a quick and easy way to find sports glasses that not only ensure clear vision but also deliver the benefits of sun, wind, and overall eye protection.

The Ride

As with any industry, trends come and go, but unfortunately for me, the oversized cycling glasses are a fashion I've been wanting to fade quicker than others.

As I wrote five years ago when reviewing the Tifosi Crit sunglasses (which are still my go-to pair to this day), "When it comes to eyewear, I'm an awkward customer. I'm a fully grown adult with a child's size head."

This means that the Rudy Project Spinshield Air sunglasses were already at a disadvantage when I tested a pair. Despite their large square size, I was surprised by how light they were. I replaced the standard nose piece with the 'Asian fit' version, which ensured that they didn't rest on my cheeks. While they didn't interfere with my helmet, the arms would need remoulding to fit around my ears. They also made me feel self-conscious about looking like I was wearing a pair of VR goggles, but I completely forgot I was wearing them while riding at a steady pace.

Regardless of the bike riding position I assumed, I remained completely unaware of the frame and was solely immersed in a sea of high-definition images. The visual clarity was particularly striking when riding through densely wooded areas. I was not only oblivious to the graduated polarizing of the lenses in both active and inactive modes, but I also observed that I could still discern a considerable level of trail detail.

However, I also noticed that when more dynamic movements were introduced to my riding, the glasses were simply too large for my face to remain absolutely secure. The Spinshield Airs certainly wouldn't be suitable for me during any vigorous activities like running or racket sports, contrary to what the marketing suggests they could handle.

Testing these glasses in colder weather usually means I expect some fogging when at a standstill, but the Spinshield Air somehow managed to remain consistently clear. This did not sacrifice wind protection, as testing in winter often results in streaming eyes when riding at speed, and I must admit that I was completely unaware of this occurring.

Value and Conclusion

As a premium-brand glass option, with genuine multi-sport potential, these have exceptional optics and really helpful integrations for prescription lenses. Weight is also best in class which is particularly impressive given their sheer size and good coverage. Whilst I’ve mentioned that they’re not fitted very close to my face they do deliver undeniably strong performance when it comes to fogging – I didn’t experience any difficulties at all.

The price is however very high in what is an increasingly competitive segment, where exceptional optics, lightweight and comfort are the price of entry. My relatively humble but high-performing Tifosi Crit glasses deliver many of the benefits and much of the quality on display here, but cost a seventh of the price. That can't be ignored.

However, if you’re happy to pay a brand premium and want to try an alternative to Oakley’s offerings, the Rudy Project Spinshield Air's are right up there in performance terms, and don’t want for anything extra.

The big change to the new shoes comes mainly in the form of a new upper, designed to be lighter and better ventilated, as well as more environmentally friendly being constructed from a Bio Veg microfibre. This planet conscious approach is a line Sidi is taking with its full range, also making many of the parts on the shoes replaceable to improve longevity. But will it add up to a shoe that rivals those featured in our best cycling shoes buyers guide?

Construction

Power transfer is delivered via the C-Boost SRS sole, rated grade 10 on the brand’s rigidity scale, the stiffest possible. It features electro nanofibre interlaminar reinforcement, with the toe and heel being replaceable.

This sole features a 3-bolt cleat attachment system, with greater fore/aft adjustment giving a more rearwards cleat option than Sidi usually offers. This is great, as a more rearward cleat position can help with foot stability, and for time trialists or triathletes, it can help increase muscle recruitment in the posterior chain. Taking the load off on longer efforts where consistent power is important.

Other Sidi staples are the proprietary Tecno-3 Push Flex dials. These are mounted centrally on the tongue and work by pushing the button to open the turn latch, and twisting to tighten. To release press the metal paddles at the top and base of the dials, and lift your foot up.

Dyneema thread is used here, useful because it stands up to attacks from road grime, it won't wear like normal thread, and doesn't stretch over time. It's reportedly 15 times stronger than steel in terms of it's tensile strength and more commonly found in bullet proof vests. The rear ankle adjustment is adorned with traditional reflective detailing and the essential Italian flag. This allows for an adjustable heel fit while being unmistakably, Sidi.

Sizes range from 38-48EU with half sizes all the way up to 47, while five colour options are available.

The ride

The fit on these shoes is quite narrow. I do have wide feet but it was noticeable when I first put them on. For context, Specialized shoes seem to suit my foot well. The Shimano wide fit is also very passable, and QUOC has another suitable one.

Italian shoes tend to, in my experience, come up narrower – much like Italian sizing in general which always seems to be a little smaller.

The likes of DMT, Fizik, and Sidi are consistently narrower by design, and Shot 2S are not an exception. If you suit a narrower fit, these will be absolutely fine. I’m not going to mark them down for not being the same shape as my feet.

Where these do suit me brilliantly though is around the heel. Sidi’s heel adjustment is great for giving a really locked in feel, especially if you have narrow ankles like mine.

I also love how supple and fresh the new uppers feel and look, with the added bonus of being easy to clean despite their white colour. However, the mesh panels on the fore-foot can get dirty more easily though.

The new upper feels more comfortable and pliable the more you ride in these shoes. Initially they didn’t provide a massive amount of give around the sides of my feet, which is where I get tend to get hot points. I didn't find this to be a big problem with this shoe and after only 15 hours of using them, they had broken in somewhat and the comfort improved, so I think you can expect them to break in like a natural leather upper, over time.

An area I couldn’t get to grips with though were the dials. These Tecno-3 Push Flex dials have been a staple on Sidi shoes for a long time now, but they are in my opinion quite a way off the ease of use you expect with Boa Li2 and S3 dials. Boa hold a lot of patents on this type of fastening and there's only so many ways you can do it, so manufacturers have sourced their own alternatives over the years, and few are better than the Boa closure.

The design of the push the button which releases the dial is easy to use when wearing thick gloves. That's welcome of course, but I'm not sure you'll be wearing your best (white) Italian shoes in the depths of winter. Tightening is easy enough and the Dyneema cables won’t ever stretch. However the placement did result in a fair bit of pressure being placed on the top of my foot, which I wasn’t a fan of. I couldn’t clamp the shoes down as fully as I like to, especially for flat out efforts. I did move the tongue slightly to the side to try and alleviate this, but it still left imprints on the top of my foot. This may have been related to the fit of course – but it may be down to the design also.

The other press-to-release switches at the top and bottom of the dials were not the easiest to use. In part this is because the Velcro on the tongue wasn't easy to lift and release. In contrast, the new Sidi Ergo 6 doesn't suffer this problem and seems to have a far easier to use set-up.

This brings me on to power transfer. The C-Boost SRS sole is exceptionally stiff, offering no flex at all but not in a way that becomes uncomfortable as you ride. The cleat mounting is also further back than other Sidi shoes. Italian shoes have historically delivered a quite forward pedalling position.

However the sole is just one part of the stiffness equation, and the uppers let it down a little for me. As mentioned, when clamping down the dials, my foot was not at all comfortable, so I had to ride with settings somewhat looser than I might have otherwise used. This was great for comfort, but for sprints or short hard efforts I do want more foot security, and it wasn't comfortable at all when cranked up. When looser, the excellent ankle retention couldn't make up for it and my foot did occasionally lift. Again, if the shoes fit your foot shape I suspect you won't have this problem.

There is one area where Sidi products shine, and that is in the fact that almost every part can be replaced, and like Trigger's infamous Broom, you could eventually end up with a completely new shoe. Without the needless waste associated with buying a new pair. With so many competitors offering little to no replaceable parts, it's great to see Sidi leading in this area, with an extensive range of spares. They're not cheap, so it's good to know that you're not going to have to replace them because one small part wears out. This is also in keeping with their shift to conscientious materials choices, in this case.

For a performance shoe, the Sidi Shot 2s, is not a lightweight. Especially not for a shoe at this price point. My pair of 45s came in at 651g without cleats. For reference the QUOC M3 Air are 506g, while the Shimano RC903 in 45 wide are 512g. As we go up the pricing scale, the problem gets worse for the Sidi because at £425 the Nimbl Ultimate Air are a featherweight 358g. Given your feet are rotating at the end of a lever, this weight is noticeable especially compared to the Nimbl shoes.

Value & conclusion

For those that want one shoe for all conditions and riding, where parts are readily replaceable and comfort is a key consideration, then the Sidi Shot 2S are great and will likely last an age.

If you like that clamped-in feeling, then there are a good number of alternatives that offer better foot security. The price is also very high at £425, putting it well into the 'halo shoe' category. That's where it struggles a little, as even in Sidi’s own range, I would consider the Ergo 6 a more practical option for many people.

My personal feeling is that the weight and slightly impractical design of the dials compared to something like the Boa Li2, might mean you could get better value shopping elsewhere, however if you can cope with it's Italian foibles, then the Sidi Shot 2S's certainly are flashy, high performance and Italian.

No, they're not the most practical shoe out there, but like all Italian classics with performance intentions, if you really want them, that won't matter. If you have a narrow foot with lower volume, these might be the 'Lamborghini' shoe you've been looking for.

Enter the Cube Nuroad C:62 SLT. On paper, it ticks every box: a lightweight carbon frame, premium components, and the capability to tackle any terrain.

A Frameset That Punches Above Its Weight

With any bike, the frame is the heart and soul, and Cube has clearly put in the work to make the Nuroad C:62 SLT a force to be reckoned with. Given that almost two-thirds of this bike’s price tag is wrapped up in the groupset alone, you might wonder if the frame has seen any compromises - but that couldn’t be further from the truth.

Cube uses its C:62 carbon layup, an advanced formula that keeps things feather-light while maintaining impressive durability and vibration absorption for all-day comfort. But they didn’t stop there. The resin used in the frame is reinforced with nanoparticles, bonding with high-modulus fibers to create a structure that’s not just lighter, but also stronger and more resilient than previous iterations.

The brand’s Advanced Twin Mold process ensures every fiber is placed with precision. The first mold guarantees an exact layup, while a secondary inner mold locks everything in place during curing, resulting in a stiffer, tougher, and more refined frame, all at a fraction of the cost of its high-end competitors.

Geometry & Capability: Built for Speed and Comfort

A well-designed frame is nothing without smart geometry, and the Nuroad C:62 SLT doesn’t disappoint. Cube’s Gravel Endurance Geometry keeps the bike comfortable for long days in the saddle, while still feeling responsive and agile when you push the pace or dive into technical singletrack.

With a 71.5-degree head tube angle and 440mm chainstays (size Medium), the bike strikes a balance between stability on rough terrain and a lively feel when you want to get aggressive. The ability to clear 50mm tires (or 45mm with mudguards) ensures the Nuroad is ready to handle anything from smooth tarmac to gnarly backcountry trails.

Rider fit is another area where Cube has nailed the details. With sizes ranging from XS to XL (50cm to 61cm frames), nearly every rider can find a comfortable fit - something not all brands manage to achieve.

Loaded with Features for Real-World Adventure

Cube isn’t just focused on performance; they’ve also packed the Nuroad with practical features to make it a true adventure machine. Here’s what you get:

• Dropped seat stays borrowed from Cube’s road and cyclocross bikes for added compliance on rough terrain.
• Multiple mounting points for bottles, racks, and bags, including a hidden top tube mount for Cube’s in-house Acid top tube bag range.
• Mudguard and rack compatibility, making the Nuroad a versatile companion for everything from bikepacking trips to daily commutes.
• Integrated seat clamp for a sleek look and minor weight savings.
• Fully integrated headset cable routing for a cleaner, more aerodynamic cockpit.
• A kickstand mount - a feature that might split opinions but adds to the bike’s practicality.

In short, Cube has covered all the bases, ensuring the Nuroad C:62 SLT is ready for whatever adventure you throw at it.

Top-Tier Build Without the Top-Tier Price

Now, let’s talk about the real showstopper: the SRAM Red XPLR AXS groupset. This is SRAM’s top-tier gravel-specific wireless electronic shifting system, and if you were to buy it separately, you’d be looking at a price tag just shy of £4,000. Given that the entire Cube Nuroad C:62 SLT costs £6,000, it begs the question - how has Cube pulled this off?

The answer lies in smart component choices. Cube has kept things simple by opting to fit a Newmen Advanced SL X.R.36 Vonoa carbon wheelset, which weighs just 1,245g - lighter than many aftermarket upgrades. These wheels are also Tour de France-proven, with riders like Biniam Girmay showcasing their performance at the highest level.

Other highlights include:

• Schwalbe G-One Kevlar tires, ready to go tubeless.
• Carbon fiber seatpost and handlebars, reducing weight and increasing comfort.
• Newmen Advanced G318 gravel handlebar, weighing just 200g and featuring a 12.5-degree flare for better control in technical terrain.

All in, the Nuroad C:62 SLT weighs just 7.5kg - exceptionally light for a gravel bike at this price point.

How Does It Compare to the Competition?

To fully appreciate the value Cube offers, let’s compare it to some of the industry heavyweights:

• Trek Checkmate SLR 9.0 – Features the same SRAM Red XPLR AXS groupset, in-house carbon wheels, and integrated cable routing. The main difference? A one-piece handlebar (which may not be for everyone). Price: £10,000 (a whopping 165% more than the Cube).
• Canyon Grail CFR XPLR – Similar spec, including the same weight of 7.5kg, yet still demands £7,899.

The takeaway? The Cube Nuroad C:62 SLT is an absolute bargain. It delivers the same high-end components as bikes costing thousands more, while offering practical features and real-world versatility that make it a standout choice for gravel riders of all levels.

The Verdict: A True Do-It-All Gravel Machine

Versatile is a term often overused in the cycling world, but in this case, it’s completely justified. The Cube Nuroad C:62 SLT blends cutting-edge technology, premium components, and adventure-ready features into a package that is simply unmatched for the price.

Whether you’re looking for a bikepacking rig, a fast gravel race bike, or just an all-around high-performance machine, the Nuroad C:62 SLT delivers. If you want top-tier performance without the top-tier price, this is one bike you absolutely need to check out.

Now in its 10th generation, the TCR is designed to be light, aerodynamic, and stiff—everything you’d expect from an all-round race bike. Visually, this latest version differs from its predecessor with fully integrated cables, and a more aggressive truncation of the tubing, giving it a noticeably beefy front end. Giant claims that the wind-tunnel tested frameset and cockpit improve ‘overall aero performance compared to the previous version’.

Looking at the spec sheet, it’s clear that you get a lot of bike for the money—or, at least, a well-specced bike for what is still a significant price. A full 105 Di2 groupset and carbon-rimmed wheels put it ahead of most competitors in this price bracket.

The construction

The frame and fork are constructed using Giant’s Advanced Composite carbon fibre, primarily utilising Toray T700 with some T800 around the bottom bracket area. With prices starting at £2,699 / $3,300 (at the time of writing) and going up to £3,799 / $5,200, the Advanced range sits at the third tier within the TCR hierarchy. Above it, the mid-range Advanced Pro models start at £3,999 / $5,700, while the flagship TCR Advanced SL range benefits from Giant’s highest-grade SL carbon, advanced layup, superior bonding processes, and is mated with top end groupsets and Giant’s premier wheels and finishing kit.

In terms of geometry, the entire TCR range remains the same, meaning you’re getting the same race-oriented DNA as the pros.

One of the most striking visual features is the way the bike tapers from a chunky front end to a slender rear. The bulky head tube, down tube, and bottom bracket contrast sharply with the skinnier top tube, which narrows from 51mm at the head tube to just 26mm at the seat tube. The narrow seat stays further enhance the sleek silhouette.

It doesn’t resemble a traditional aero bike - Giant still has the Propel for that - so you might assume aerodynamics weren’t a priority. However, the wide downtube has been optimised to work with a 500ml water bottle, and to perform efficiently across a range of yaw angles, making Giant’s aero claims convincing.

Tyre clearance is pretty generous and in line with current road bike trends, accommodating up to 33mm tyres.

This model features an almost full Shimano 105 Di2 groupset, with 140mm rear and 160mm front RT70 rotors and 105 callipers. The gearing consists of a semi-compact 36/52 175.5mm chainset paired with an 11-34 cassette, linked by a KMC chain. A Shimano press-fit bottom bracket completes the drivetrain.

The cockpit and contact points are Giant’s proprietary components, with subtle branding. The Approach saddle features steel rails and a cut-out design, mounted on a D-shaped seatpost that balances aerodynamics with a degree of compliance. The handlebars measure 42cm (C-C) on this M/L size model. Brake hoses run neatly under the Contact stem and integrate with the frame via a spacer just below it.

This is the first model in the range equipped with carbon wheels as standard. The in-house SLR 2 wheelset is 36mm deep, providing a good all-round option. Designed to be run tubeless, the hookless rims have an internal width of 22.4mm and an external width of 26mm. The tyres are Giant’s own Gavia Course 1 in 25mm, though Giant claims they measure 28mm when mounted on these rims—I measured them slightly wider.

The ride

A bike so closely resembling those raced at WorldTour level will always be well-balanced, handle precisely, and respond instantly to rider input. From my first ride, it was clear that even at this price point, the Giant remains an out-and-out race bike. Instant accelerations delivered a direct and efficient feel.

On fast, sweeping bends, the bike inspired confidence, while in tighter, crit-style corners, it felt agile and easy to adjust mid-turn—ideal for reacting quickly to unexpected line changes.

There’s no doubt this is a stiff bike. Within the first few hundred metres, that much was obvious, and if I had somehow missed it, the SLR 2 wheels chimed in with a couple of noticeable pings as they settled in. As the ride progressed, I found myself wondering how much of the bike’s lively nature came from the wheels and tyres.

On rougher roads, the ride was undeniably firm. I wasn’t expecting a plush experience—this isn’t that type of bike—but I did double-check my tyre pressures and wheel width after the ride. Despite being set up tubeless from the factory, I wondered whether I had mistakenly inflated the tyres more than intended. Given the 22.4mm internal and 26mm external rim widths, plus 25mm tyres that measure 28mm in reality, the setup should provide enough compliance to absorb higher-frequency vibrations. A more supple tyre casing would likely improve comfort—a common observation for bikes in this price range

Shimano’s Di2 shifting needs no introduction—it’s a pleasure to use, and Giant deserves credit for including nearly a full Di2 setup at this price. There’s also a SRAM Rival eTap AXS version available for an extra £100 if Shimano isn’t your preference.

Despite weighing 7.94kg, the TCR feels lighter than the scales suggest, with every ounce of energy transferred efficiently to the road.

Personally, I would prefer the bars to have a slight flare, which would allow for a narrower top section, more in line with the higher-end models. While I don’t mind a wider position, the 42cm bars felt broad compared to what I’m used to on race bikes. Angling the hoods inwards helped, but it’s a subjective preference and an easy swap. A notable portion of this generation’s claimed aero gains come from the aero bars and integrated cables, so it’s a shame this model comes with standard round bars—they look like the one cost-saving compromise.

The other aspect worth considering is the wheels. If you already own a decent set, it might be worth questioning whether you need the carbon ones supplied with this model. They handled winter crosswinds admirably, offering stability and confidence, and the tyres felt durable. However, the alloy-rimmed version of this bike is £500 cheaper and the rest of spec is identical. That raises the question: should you save that money and invest in a deeper, faster wheelset for the flats?

Specs

• Sizes: S, M, ML, L, XL
• Colours: Gloss Frost Silver/Cold Iron
• Frame: Advanced-Grade Composite 12x142mm thru-axle, Disc
• Fork: Advanced-Grade Composite, Full-Composite OverDrive Steerer, 12x100mm thru-axle, Disc
• Handlebar: Giant Contact
• Stem: Giant Contact Aerolight
• Seatpost: Giant Variant, composite, -5/+15mm offset
• Saddle: Giant Approach 7mm Steel Rail, with UniClip / ParticleFlow technology
• Shifters: Shimano 105 Di2 2x12
• Front Derailleur: Shimano 105 Di2
• Rear Derailleur: Shimano 105 Di2
• Brakes: Shimano 105 hydraulic disc, RT70 160/140mm rotors
• Cassette: Shimano 105, 11x34
• Crankset: Shimano 105, 36/52
• Rims: Giant SLR 2 36 Carbon Disc Wheel System
• Hubs: [F] Giant Low Friction Hub, CenterLock, 12mm thru-axle [R] Giant Low Friction Hub, 30t pawl driver, CenterLock, 12mm thru-axle
• Tyres: Giant Gavia COURSE 1 Tubeless, 700x25C(28mm effective)

Construction

To fend off the elements as well as provide durability, Castelli's Gear Backpack uses a water and stain resistant exterior material. Water resistant zippers aim to boost the weather resistance. Maximum volume is claimed to be 26 litres capacity, while the dimensions of the pack are 56 x 35 x 15cm.

Internally there are three main compartments. The main body houses a padded laptop sleeve and mesh zip up mesh pocket. Compartment two uses another zip up interior pocket and a lanyard hook. The final compartment uses a side entrance for easier access to essentials. There is also a water bottle holder on the side externally. All of the interior materials are easy to wipe clean.

Additional features include external loops to attach lights or clip on a helmet. The large rear straps are designed to offer support across the shoulders while perforated rear panels aim to boost breathability. These main straps also feature attachment points for lights. There are both chest and waist clip straps for added security and improved weight distribution as well as small reflective details on the straps and front of the backpack.

The ride

For me, the key to a good backpack is just how much you can actually fit inside it. And 26 litres of storage is a good amount for a bag this size, if not class leading. However, it’s also about how accessible that space is and what you are packing. The main large body of the bag is the right size to be able to put a pair of cycling shoes right at the bottom while still piling up kit and clothing items on top of that for a long weekend away. The padded laptop bag is a great addition, which doesn’t add excessive bulk but does provide essential protection for an expensive item. It can however be a little hard to access if you really pack the bag fully.

The other main compartments are not as spacious, but the placement of zipped internal pockets help make valuables more easily accessible. For commuting to work, the size is easily spacious enough to put office shoes and clothes in the bag. The easy to wipe down interior is also great, ensuring that even if it does gets dirty, it’s easy to clean.

None of the pockets are easily accessible while wearing the backpack, save for the bottle holder. I do like how the zips all have tabs to make them straightforward to open and close even with gloves on.

I haven’t tested it in the rain to see how dry it keeps the contents, but I’ve used Castelli saddlebags with the same zip structure, and they are not fully waterproof. The water resistance and shower proofing is very good though.

Another important element is how comfortable a backpack is to wear. This is where the Castelli Backpack absolutely shines. Even when fully packed to over 20kg / 44lbs, the wide straps with their padded and perforated material are incredibly comfortable and spread the weight nicely over the shoulders and back. The sternum and hip straps aim to add further stability, but in practice I never found that I needed them, so comfortable and secure were the standard straps. I also found in warmer temperatures the perforated elements of the backpack did seem to help avoid excessive heat buildup.

I appreciate the amount of additional features this backpack has, helping make it suitable for commuting. On the straps and the face of the backpack it has attachment points for lights to be fitted. This is especially useful given the relative lack of reflective detailing on the bag. These clips can also be used to hang a helmet from when the commute turns from cycling to walking.

As mentioned previously, the internal zip pockets being positioned at the top of the compartments does make access to valuables nice and easy for the user. Something that is missing though is more of a 'clamshell' opening system. I found that when items were packed at the bottom of the bag, the rest of the contents needed to be removed to access them. With a clamshell design the bag can be opened out to grab specific contents and pack more effectively in my experience.

A huge plus point, especially with UK airlines cracking down on bag size and giving on the spot charges for bags that are too large, is that it fits within RyanAir and EasyJet carry-on bag size allowance. Indeed, I was slightly surprised that it fitted within the airline's size restrictions given how much I had packed for a flight to Spain.

Value & conclusion

In terms of price, £170 is certainly towards the more premium end for a cycling specific backpack. However, when assessing value for money, the Castelli bag performs pretty well. The 26-litre storage is a fair bit more than many of the backpacks featured in our best backpacks for cycling buyers guide, while the price is not much higher.

The CamelBak and Rapha options do feature either a clamshell design or larger opening for the main compartments, but availability nowadays for those models is scarce. Most competitors use a roll-top design which is even less practical for accessing contents at the bottom of the bag.

All told, the Castelli Gear Backpack is a very effective travel backpack that’s perfect for commuting or flying. Comfort and overall storage are the key highlights, while attachment points for lights are greatly appreciated along with its protection against showers. It does lack reflective detailing, and a clamshell design is better for access and packing, but it’s still a great option.

Construction

The use of Merino is due to the fabric having natural high moisture wicking, quick drying properties, highly breathable and anti-bacterial, which it decided was ideal for gravel and adventure riding where conditions can be quite variable and it may need cleaning day to day. The synthetic fibres used alongside the Merino are designed to enhance durability and stretch retention over time and use.

Le Col includes a repair patch with the jersey, something the design team thought was needed given the intended use. There are also reflective details on the chest, arm, back and rear shoulder, which are designed to give a 360˚visibility.

The ARC jersey uses a more relaxed fit designed to aid freedom of movement yet still sit close to the body; it's what the brand calls its Relaxed Performance fit. Other features include three large rear cargo pockets and a zip up valuables pockets with a pull tab to make it easier to open and close. The jersey comes in sizes XS to 3XL and three colour options with a recommended temperature range of 5-15˚C from the brand.

The ride

I’ve always been a big fan of the use of Merino in cycling clothing. It’s an interesting material in that it remains very breathable up to quite high temperatures while being nicely insulating, giving it a wide operating temperature range. As discussed, Le Col has decided to base this jersey, and the other jerseys in its ARC range, on predominantly Merino wool. It still uses polyamide and elastane to assist with fit and durability, but the benefits of the Merino shine though.

Using the jersey across a range of wintery conditions in the UK and Spain, I found that it performed well between 7-18˚C. The only thing that affected that was the wind, as the jersey offers zero wind chill protection. As a result on blustery days or long descents I did get chilly.

I loved just how breathable the jersey was; it's exceptionally good at moisture wicking so that after hard efforts where sweat builds up, it evaporates quickly, which reduces chill when the intensity level drops.

I ended up using this for two rides in a single day when I didn’t have a clean alternative jersey. The antimicrobial properties of Merino did mean it was far more pleasant than wearing a used lycra jersey. As a jersey with a designated gravel focus it's an appealing feature. It should make for a garment that can handle multi-day adventure rides, especially as it also drys quickly meaning that it can be water washed before being worn again.

One thing that didn’t work quite so well for me was the fit, specifically around the waist. The arm and body length were perfect in the size medium on my 190cm frame, but I have quite a narrow waist. When I had the pockets full at the back, especially when one side was unevenly weighted, I found that out of the saddle the jersey jumped around a bit. Additionally, even with the elastic gripper at the rear hem, the jersey could twist on my body. It’s likely a combination of unevenly loading the pockets and an unusually narrow waist, although the more relaxed fit does lend itself to some give. This fit however is not overly flappy, so riding at speed on the road it was still suitable, it just means it’s a bit more comfortable for layering and big days on the bike.

I did like the pockets as they were spacious enough for spare kit, tools, food, phone and even a pump. A zip-up valuable pocket works well for stashing keys; all the zips, including the main jersey one, feature a useful pull tab to make them easy to operate. A few reflective details are also appreciated for winter weather and long days on the bike; the green particularly popping against the purple jersey.

Something I really like, which is a theme of the ARC range, is the inclusion of a repair patch. The jersey has been designed to be tear resistant, but in the event of damage, a repair patch is a great addition and I commend the design team as I have not seen this very often in many of the mainstream brand offerings, even with gravel focus.

Value & conclusion

The ARC jersey generally delivers good value. The wide temperature range it's comfortable in makes it incredibly versatile, while the Merino fabric is extremely practical, especially for adventure riding. However, it does lack any form of wind or weather proofing, and even with the fast moisture wicking it’s not a jersey to be used in rain while windchill can bite.

The ability to repair tears and also the fact it features some more durable complimentary fabrics does help boost the longevity, which goes a long way in helping its 'value for money' status. But at the end of the day £180 for a long sleeved jersey is a lot. It’s comparable to other Merino jersey offerings, and although the Rapha Classic LS Jersey is £30 cheaper, it uses half the Merino fabric. The fit on that is better suited to road riding though or those with a narrower waist.

Overall, I think for those who are looking to do long adventure rides, and needing clothing that will work well across a wide range of temperatures, stay fresh on big days or even multi-day events, and have added durability, then the Le Col ARC jersey is a superb option. For road riders who want something perhaps better suited to colder weather, there are better value options. However, this is a gravel and adventure jersey, and to that end it really does nail the design brief.

All of this is trickling down to consumers as the market adjusts to the new standard set by the sport's cutting-edge athletes. This momentum has led to new and novel ways for cyclists to think about products and find the right options to make their riding experience as enjoyable as possible. Tyres are, after all, where the rubber meets the road.

A notable shift in this sea change is the rise of supersized road tyres, with an increasing amount of options now available in the 35mm-40mm range – all promising little to no speed loss from the former standard of 25mm-28mm tyres. But how do these beefy tyres really compare to the race-tested “skinies”? And who are these tyres made for?

I’ve been putting the market’s leading big-volume road tyres to the test to find out.

The making of a convert

The seed of this story started a year ago at the launch of the Enve Fray, an all-road bike built around 35mm tyres. While I only rode the Fray a few times, I was able to bring the 35mm Enve SES tyres home with me. Over the next few weeks, I grew to really like the wide 35mm slick tread, which improved the road riding performance on my gravel bike.

As a roadie at heart, I was initially surprised by how much I liked them, especially considering that 28-31mm tyres are still the race standard at WorldTour events. This piqued my curiosity about other wide tyre options on the market – a small but growing sector.

I was keen to explore a few key questions:

• Who are these tyres for?
• At what width do tyres lose their benefits?
• In the superwide category, does puncture-resistance come before speed?
• And do the benefits of width win in the long run?

For the past year, I have exclusively ridden on various thick, slick tyres to answer some of these questions. My test pool consisted of eight different tyres from seven different brands at five different widths. Each model was ridden hundreds of miles over a variety of tarmac and light gravel surfaces. Additionally, every tyre was mounted on the same set of Enve 4.5 rims, incidentally, the same wheelset that UAE Team Emirates have been riding this past season.

While there was a great deal of variance between the different models and widths, this test was not about the specific tyre, but rather to find a use case for these (super) wide road tyres in general riding as well as adapting gravel bikes to the road in a more effective manner. It wasn’t long into the testing before I knew I was onto something.

28mm tyres are not optimal for all-road and gravel bikes

The primary market for these wide slicks has historically been commuters and bike tourers. Yet, thanks to a booming gravel and all-road market, an increasing number of riders are using their off-road bikes as versatile, all-purpose machines. It's now just as common to see them on paved roads as it is on gravel.

However, when treating a gravel bike like a road bike, there are parameters to consider, especially when it comes to speed and efficiency. Simply throwing on what would be the fastest tyre option for a road bike is not going to be optimal on a gravel bike. Here’s why:

Geometry

Gravel bikes, without exception, have a longer wheelbase, which allows for bigger tyre clearance and a more stable ride feel. There are other geometric changes, too, but the wheelbase is the big shift between road and gravel bikes.

The frame was designed around high-volume tyres. When using smaller, lower-volume tyres –standard road tyres, in short– on a gravel bike, the longer wheelbase effectively drops the centre of gravity of that bike. The even lower bottom bracket height increases the risk of pedal strike. It may also make the bike’s handling feel even slower.

Aerodynamics

In most cases, narrower is better for aerodynamics. Yet, when it comes to the tyre-frame interface, the benefits of narrower tyres are less clear-cut. Gravel bikes often have robust downtubes designed for stiffness and durability and were not aerodynamically shaped to match the profile of 25-30mm tyres, as seen on road bikes.

Speaking broadly, pairing a slick 35-45mm tyre with a gravel frame will not be a significant aerodynamic penalty. Quite the opposite, it may even be an aerodynamic gain. Throughout discussions with several engineers and aerodynamic experts, it all comes down to the importance of system aerodynamics – the way the frame, the wheels and the tyres all work together. Wind tunnel testing is the only way to draw specific conclusions between frame, wheels and tyres but if there is a rule to follow, matching the width of the tyres and rims to tube shape is likely to yield a better aerodynamic system rather than a narrower tyre.

Wider does not necessarily mean slower

After many months of testing wider tyres for road riding, the overwhelming benefit was a smoother ride without the sacrifices one expects from compliance – primarily speed.

Compliance is the most anecdotal of all testing data points, as it comes down to ‘feel.’ For me, the benefit of a larger volume tyre was compounded by where I do most of my road riding, which is in and around Phoenix, Arizona. With some of the most intense summer temperatures in the United States, Phoenix is uniquely challenged in its ability to maintain roads to the same standard as other states. Pair that with relatively low taxes, and you are left with poorly maintained pavement that is anything but smooth. That environment showed that a major efficiency gain can actually be felt when using larger-volume road tyres. The gain here is comfort, which in turn translates into less body fatigue and a more consistent speed across bumpy terrain.

We’ve all heard it said before: smooth is fast. And this is because of the under-discussed enemy of speed: suspension drag.

Suspension drag is the loss of speed, or efficiency to be precise, of an object in forward motion due to vibrations, bumps or other vertical movement. Or, to put it differently, any vertical movement will cause the object to have less energy propelling it forward. In cycling, the greatest cause for that vertical movement is the road surface.

These suspension losses, as they are most frequently called, factor into a bike tyre's overall rolling resistance. Thus, rolling resistance in a lab test is very different from rolling resistance on the actual road. Regardless of what the lab test says is most efficient, that test is only accounting for the hysteretic losses of a tyre – the energy lost as heat due to the continuous deformation and flexing of the tyre as it makes contact with the road while rolling. Accurately assessing the suspension losses, which are the counterparts to hysteretic losses, is virtually impossible on a drum because road surfaces are inconsistent.

“If you test tyres in the lab, you're only measuring the hysteretic losses in the tyre casing, and so generally the harder you pump up the tyre, the less losses you have,” Jan Heine told Cycling Weekly. Heine is the CEO of the tyre company Rene Herse and is an expert on the matter.

“But when we started testing on real roads, we found that that's not true at all. Lower pressures roll just as fast. From that point, we realised we don't need narrow tyres, because at lower pressures, we can make wider tyres with supple casings. But the big question we still had was, why do we see such different behavior on the road compared to in the lab?”

Heine credits Jim Papadopoulos, a former tech expert, for uncovering a key insight to this question in his book Cycling Science. Papadopoulos referenced a United States Army study on tank vibrations, where the drivers absorbed 2000 watts from vibrations. This led to the realisation that energy loss from vibrations was slowing down the vehicle. Heine notes that lab tests, which didn’t account for the rider or uneven surfaces, missed this important factor in measuring energy loss on bikes.

In cycling, we’re dealing with much smaller forces and, at least on tarmac, fewer vibrations, yet the physics are the same – vibration is an enemy of forward movement and one that’s undervalued in cycling at large.

“[Tyre size] almost doesn't matter, because the suspension losses and the hysteretic losses balance each other out,” Heine said about what he finds to be the right width on smooth tarmac.

“I'm just as happy on a smooth road on a 32 millimeter tyre running 55-60 psi, or a 54 millimeter slick tyre, with the same tyre construction that I'm running at 25 mm.”

Yet, whenever the road has any kind of imperfections, the width must go up to balance the equation.

How wide is too wide?

A fundamental question heading into the testing was at what width do tyres lose their benefits?

Ultimately, there are very few slick options above 700c x 44mm, so that is where I topped out in size. On that end of the spectrum, I looked to Rene Herse because the brand has long championed wide tyres for road riding and has several options.

I tested the 700c x 44mm Snoqualmie Pass model in both the sturdy Endurance casing and the supple Extralight casing. I found that the two casings offer two completely different ride feels. The Endurance Casing offers a ride quality that is in line with a semi-slick gravel tyre, minus the knobs. With a heavy rubber compound, the tyre is better protected against thorns, sharp rocks or other impacts that could ruin your ride. Yet, as is always the case when discussing tyres, there is always a trade-off. The thicker casing is heavier and less malleable, with higher suspension losses relative to a more supple tyre construction.

The Extralight Casing is at the opposite end of that spectrum, with a very lightweight construction and a thin, malleable sidewall. It is, however, more susceptible to pinch flats and sidewall cuts. With that said, the Extralight Casing performs great on smooth gravel, and on tarmac, the 44mm tyre rolls as well as anything else on the market.

For riding on paved roads exclusively, I found the 44mm width too wide for handling and aerodynamics.

Even if wider tyres cause less of an aero penalty with the wider tubes of a gravel bike, there are limits to that equation. With the frame I tested –a Rodeo Labs Trail Donkey 4.0- the 44mm exceeded that threshold. Across different terrain, the tyre climbed well, without much of a speed penalty relative to other, smaller tyres. Yet, the tyre was consistently slower on the downhills and flat roads.

The added volume created handling challenges on the tarmac as well. The added height that comes with the increase in volume raises the height of the bike relative to the bottom bracket, which creates a less stable ride. For riders who typically ride smaller frames, those challenges can present at an even lower volume of 44mm. Off-road, that volume is less challenging because the handling demands differ, but when the surface is fast and predictable, the larger volume makes the handling suboptimal.

The sidewall's malleability also exemplifies that unease at speed. Once again, this is where the difference between off-road priorities and road performance diverges. When the surface is hard, smooth, and predictable, a thin sidewall that reduces the all-important suspension losses is less important than a sidewall construction that fortifies enough to retain its shape while under a load through higher-speed corners. When the sidewall is light and malleable, the confidence the tyre inspires is sacrificed.

How the industry is adjusting to the new normal

Of all the tyres I tested over the past year, the 40mm Pirelli P Zero TLR came out on top. While it might have been conceived as a fast gravel tyre, the result is a product that feels to be a future-proofed all-road tyre that provides speed at a width well-suited for a wide range of riders.

“We decided to work on the bigger P Zero TLR to create the fastest gravel tyre possible,” said Samuele Bressa, Global Marketing Manager at Pirelli.

“The two people we were trying to serve were pros and amateur riders who ride on light gravel. For the pros, the idea is that the slick is ok because they have the skill to navigate the loose turns without the tread. For the amateurs, the turns are slower, but they can have the advantage of speed on the straights. Much more speed.”

The TLR is a cousin of the heralded P Zero RS tyre, which is their top-of-the-line road racing option. While the RS is the fastest road compound Pirelli has in its stable, the RS was too light of a construction to have the durability needed in the all-around 40mm version of the P Zero line. Yet, the TLR has properties similar to its faster counterpart and tests similar in rolling resistance to the brand’s collection of road tyres.

With high-volume tyres, simply making a tyre bigger isn’t as easy as it sounds. The way the tyre interacts with the width of the rim, for instance, changes the tread height. This, in turn, determines how steep the crown of the tyre is. The crown and height can dramatically impact how the tyre handles on all surfaces, especially over uneven or slick areas.

All of this has resulted in a robust tyre for the road that performs incredibly well. This is because the tyre’s durability does not come from a thicker rubber construction or a lower TPI count, which can lead to a sluggish-feeling tyre. Instead, the P Zero has the quality of a higher-performance road tyre with some increased durability afforded by the much bigger margin for error that comes with 40mm of volume.

“The 35 was born from the road and our partnership with LIDL-Trek,” Samuela said. “Last year, the team did lots of testing with the 35mm tyre before Paris-Roubaix. They didn’t race on it this year, but it did help the development. The 40 was the primary option for the gravel riders and gravel bikes.”

Pirelli’s team partnerships recently expanded when the brand replaced Vittoria as the tyre sponsor for Alpecin-Deceuninck. The partnership means the reigning UCI Gravel World Champion and Paris-Roubaix victor will now ride the full line of Pirelli tyres at the biggest races across four disciplines, which can only push development forward.

Yet, despite the speed and strength of the 40mm P Zero TLR, we're unlikely to see it raced at Paris-Roubaix.

“A 40mm could be good for Paris-Roubaix, but the aerodynamics is the big unknown,” Samuela said. “It could be faster but it would have to exist in a new bike system. The frame, wheels, and tyres would all have to be considered, which means you would have a special frame for one race because if you make a bike aero optimised for a 40mm, a 30mm tyre is no longer aerodynamic.”

But since I’m not racing the Paris-Roubaix, I’ll happily take the marginal aerodynamic penalties in favour of compliance that gives me more power and less soreness at the end of long rides.

Conclusion

The tricky thing about a topic like wide road tyres, speeding up gravel bikes or the balance between road and gravel demands is just how complicated the confounding variables are. Aerodynamics are highly variable, handling is vastly different with the same size tyres on different size frames, and vibrations are never the same twice, even on the same route.

However, after consistently riding this category of tyre across many different brands and different widths, all those variables coalesce into a key shift in understanding that I have had in adopting wider road tyres for the vast majority of my riding. Bigger volume tyres are smoother, they are more efficient when the pavement has any consistent imperfection, they are better at managing fatigue, and they make handling better on bikes with gravel geometry.

“It used to be that we’d say, ‘well, you need to tough it out, because you want to go fast.’” Jan Heine said. “So, you know, the bike was vibrating like crazy at 130 psi, which was ridiculous, but we thought the vibrations were the cost of speed. And now we realise it's the opposite. The more you have to tough it out, the slower you go.

“If somebody had told me 10 years ago that the Tour de France winner would be on 30 or 31 mm of tyres, I would have laughed and said,’ You're kidding me.’ And I can tell you our most popular gravel tyres. Used to be the Bon Jon Pass 35 mm that's now our most popular road tyre.”

Tyres tested

The construction

Three main fabrics are used in the construction. UF Hybrid is the brand's key weather proof material offering windproofing along with water repellency. This is used across the front panels around the chest and arms where the wind impacts. It provides water repellency via its high-density weave, rather than additional treatments or membranes being applied. Meanwhile at the rear Q36.5 uses its Pinstripe material for ventilation and heat expulsion. This includes silver thread, which has a higher heat transfer rate for aiding temperature regulation. Finally, across the stomach and forearms a lightweight fleece material is used to keep these areas warmer, something we see in some of the best long sleeve cycling jerseys.

Fit wise, Q36.5 has used its own Body Mapping process to design and attach the panels in a way that aims to keep the freedom of movement while still achieving a close and secure fit when in a cycling position. For storage there are three main cargo pockets along with a zip up valuables pocket. Sizes available are XS up to XXXL, while three colour options are available. All feature reflective detailing on the sleeves, and on the front zip guard.

The ride

The Dottore jersey is a blend of a long sleeved jersey and a winter jacket. The fabric feels comfortable against the skin, but more sturdy than traditional jersey materials. This is likely due to the fabric being higher density so feels to have just a little less stretch than polyamide and elastane mixes. It still fits comfortably though, and I’ll get on to how this fabric performs in terms of weather proofing later.

What’s particularly impressive here is the body mapped fitting. The jersey conforms to your body, be it in a more upright position, or hunched over the handlebars. The body is long enough, the sleeves don’t leave gaps with light weight gloves on at the wrists, and the pocket placement makes them easy to access.

Another of its attributes is just how well it performs across a wide range of temperatures. Despite being in Spain during the testing period, the weather swung between 18˚C and 4˚C. In the colder temperatures with a bit of sun, the black material, which there are three areas of, absorbed the sun nicely while the fleece front made a noticeable difference in lower temperatures. I wore it with only a sleeveless mesh base layer and this was perfect for down to around 8-10˚C. Any cooler and a gilet or heavier base layer was required.

However, as the temperature warmed up the jersey still felt comfortable. Its rear uses a lighter construction down the centre to allow for excess heat dissipation, while silver thread is used for faster heat transfer so that in 15˚C it was still a good temperature. The brand’s aim is to keep the body in the optimal working temperature of 36.5˚C, and I have to say this philosophy does seem to be strongly adhered to in the performance of the Dottore LS jersey.

Weatherproofing is another area where the jersey performs impressively. Often, when cycling in Spain in the winter, you warm up climbing the mountains, then have 10-15 minutes of low effort, high speed, and big windchill. Here the Dottore balanced the thermoregulation and insulation brilliantly with the wind proofing performance of the high density material doing wonders. When it needs to be, it does perform more like a winter jacket, with water repellency added to that list of attributes.

Other features I really enjoy with this jersey are the raw cut sleeves, which means no seams that can dig in on the wrist when worn underneath gloves. The rear cargo pockets are also nicely spacious for cramming with food and tools. I like the little security flap of material over the top of the pockets which makes them easy to access while preventing items from coming out over rough roads. The slightly higher neck is useful for insulation, while the zips are sturdy and easy to use. Overall, the jersey just performs exceptionally well.

Value & conclusion

This is the area where the jersey does need to be carefully considered, as at £238 it is one of the most expensive long sleeve jersey options that I’ve seen available. Jerseys from the likes of Castelli Espresso Thermal and Rapha Pro Team Midweight are far cheaper at £140 and £165. It puts it in the same price bracket as the PNS Mechanism Thermal jersey at £240, or the Assos Mille GTO LS at £245.

Where the Q36.5 Dottore does excel though is what it offers for that price. It really does fill the gap between a long sleeved jersey and a winter jacket, without much compromise on either side. With a thicker base layer it can perform in 5˚C, while it is also capable in 15˚C and sunny weather. It may be that this single item can be used instead of two separate ones. The level of performance does go quite a way to justifying the value of this jersey.

The Q36.5 Dottore Hybrid Que LS jersey makes a good case for not needing to buy both a long sleeve jersey and a winter jacket, and instead combine the two into this one item. It’s effective at insulating down to quite low temperatures, yet also impressively breathable. It’s not cheap, but it goes a long way to justifying that price with the levels of performance and versatility.

These are intended as a multi-purpose option, with relatively conservative numbers in terms of drop, reach and flare, making them just as well suited to an all-road bike as a gravel bike. FSA offers the K-Force AGX carbon bar for those wanting a more gravel-specific bar - with an even more premium price tag.

The K-Wing promises excellent ergonomics, low weight and is compatible with all cable routing options and gear systems. It's available in 400, 420, 440, 460, 480mm widths.

Construction

The FSA K-Wing AGX may well be the most sculpted handlebar I’ve encountered. FSA has made full use of carbon’s mouldable properties to produce a bar with multiple dimples, divots, holes and flat spots whilst still retaining an ostensibly normal silhouette. It isn’t outrageously flared or dramatically shaped but is instead the result of lots of thoughtful and subtle manipulation.

The basic dimensions are those of a standard, compact gravel bar with 115mm drop, 76mm reach and 12° flare, but those numbers do not tell the whole story.

From the round, textured centre, the bars rise by 5mm (much less than the Specialized Hover bar) and flatten into an aero shape whilst also gently curving forward by 10°, making them look quite aggressive. The outside corner of the bend towards the hoods is depressed to the point of being concave and the outside of the flared drops under the levers is also flattened and squared off.

Underneath, there are ingress and egress points to run cables internally which can exit into the stem if compatible (FSA’s Aerodynamic integrated Cable Routing (ACR)) or just before the stem if fully internal cabling isn’t an option. Should you choose not to run the cables through the bars at all then there is a runnel on the underside to nestle them into.

Phew - I said that there was a lot going on with this bar!

The ride

Obviously, as a self-confessed weight weenie, the first port of call was the scales - FSA gives a weight of 205g for the 420mm option but the 440mm test pair were 228g. Still very light considering everything that is going on with them and about 70g lighter than the stock aluminium bars that came on my Cannondale Topstone - a decent but not earth-shattering saving on a gravel bike. My tape measure suggested that centre-to-centre behind the hoods was 43cm and 50cm at the end of the drops.

I chose not to run the cables internally as my stem isn’t compatible and it didn’t seem worth it for a few centimetres through the tops as I was intending to fully tape the bars anyway. If you were going to leave the tops untapped or could run the cables through the stem as well then this would give a super clean look to the front end and leave FSA’s graphics visible.

The forward sweep added a little bit of reach to my position although this was offset to some extent by the slight rise and narrower width compared to my original handlebars. Cannondales C3 gravel bars have a 16° flare, whereas the K-Wing AGXs offer a more reserved 12°, and I found that I preferred this. The wider bars could occasionally feel a bit ungainly and spread my arms awkwardly whereas the FSA bars felt far more natural when in the drops.

The ovalised tops on the other hand were perhaps a little too large when wrapped in bar tape; I don’t have small hands, but the combination of winter gloves, 3.5mm padded Profile Designs tape and the aero shape was a little bit of a stretch for me. Without tape or without gloves they might have been fine, but with below-zero temps and rough trails, I wasn’t about to experiment with either!

I really loved the flattened sections on the corners leading to the hoods. Given (much) warmer weather I generally ride without gloves, and although I don’t suffer from ulnar issues, long off-road rides can lead to a bit of soreness. These dimples gave me a lovely, flat section that definitely reduced pressure on the heel of my hands and it became a favourite position to ride in if not fully on the hoods.

Although I liked the narrower, less flared dimensions, the squared-off tubing of the drops wasn’t particularly noticeable to me, although I confess that I don’t spend much of my gravel riding time down there anyway.

I’d be lying if I tried to claim that I could detect any form of extra vibration damping thanks to the high-grade carbon construction of the bars on my 45mm tyre-equipped gravel bike with a Redshift suspension stem, but there was no untoward flex when out of the saddle either. Lore would suggest that there should be some extra damping from the carbon, and perhaps on a more rigid bike with narrower, higher-pressure tyres it would be more noticeable.

And finally, aesthetically, they looked superb, adding some extra purpose and subtle bling to the bike as carbon components often do.

Value and conclusion

The price of the FSA K-Wing AGX carbon handlebar is a heady £340, which although it is in line with many other high-end carbon road bars seems a lot for a gravel bike build somehow. Perhaps it is the thought that gravel bikes are often treated rather less considerately than mollycoddled summer road bikes and that the likelihood of damaging them seems higher.

I was surprised by how much difference the bars made in terms of comfort though, and how much nicer they were to ride compared with my basic bars. The formed carbon was undoubtedly a more comfortable place to rest my hands and the overall shape suited me very well. If you are building a dream gravel racer without a one-piece set-up or perhaps if you suffer from hand/ulnar issues then they are a lovely, highly ergonomic option, but for the rest of us, £340 is a lot for something to crash, tie luggage to and get filthy every weekend.

I think that they would be ideal on a high-end all-road bike. The shape is perfect for long-distance mile-munching whilst the slight flare still feels perfectly natural on or off-road and the small weight advantage might be more relevant than on a gravel bike. Also, the tops could be left untaped making them easier to hold and they wouldn’t be quite as much at risk of terminal damage.

Price aside, these are a 5 star product with no real flaws unless you want a wider flare, but at over £300 they have to forgo half a star.

The Kreissäge RS is particularly intriguing because it’s made from aluminium, a metal that rarely gets a good press these days, and one that most of us now associate with budget frames. At €1,949 for the frameset alone, the Kreissäge RS is not super-expensive but it’s hardly pin money. The question bound to eat away at anyone considering this bike is: ‘Am I just paying for the name?’

Rightly or wrongly, Standert has become an influencers’ favourite in recent years. Founded in 2012 in Berlin - a city celebrated for its young, alternative, arty scene - it quickly evolved from bike shop and café to a brand making aesthetically pleasing aluminium and steel performance road and gravel bikes.

Since then, it’s become a successful brand that, despite outgrowing its cult status, has never lost its edgy, urban appeal. Unfortunately, posting a ‘posing with my Standert’ reel has become a thing right now, so it’s only natural to question whether Standert bikes are a triumph of form over function. Let’s find out.

The frame

The Kreissäge RS is a crit racer, a bike designed to excel at 90 minutes or less of all-out efforts over short, tight courses with more corners than a myriagon. A discipline where acceleration, deceleration and pin-sharp handling count for everything. Where, if there can only be one winner, stiffness for power transfer trumps compliance for comfort.

So, as it turns out, aluminium, a metal notorious for being resolutely stiff and unyielding, is a great choice for a crit bike, demonstrated by the number of ally Specialized Allez Sprint framesets you’re sure to find jostling for position at any start line.

Standert’s claimed weight for a size 54 frame is 1,470g plus 430g for the carbon fork, which isn’t bad but a slightly larger size 56 Allez Sprint frameset weighs in at 2.18kg, so there’s really not much in it.

The frame, which is built by Dedacciai in Italy, has a horizontal top tube more on the level than Mother Theresa. It looks super traditional; you won’t find any dropped stays or 3D-printed tube junctions here. Even the front derailleur is band-on, which looks a bit fussy and antiquated, but perhaps the thin-walled tubing isn’t robust enough for a braze-on plate. Welding is neat and tidy throughout - overall, the beads are straight and regular with little excess material.

Geo is aggressive, as you’d expect from a race bike, but not crazy hardcore. Visually, the Kreissäge is defined by its short wheelbase, long top tube, shortish head tube, and low front end, and the figures bear this out. For comparison, I’ve added the Allez Sprint’s metrics in brackets. For a size 56, the wheelbase is 986mm (992mm), chainstays 410mm (410mm), stack 560mm (558mm), reach 390 (398mm), head tube angle 73.5° (73.5°) and seat tube angle 73.5° (73.5°).

Build

The Kreissäge RS is highly customisable at point of sale using Standert’s online configurator. The base model, which features a Shimano 105 Di2, groupset, aluminium DT Swiss AR 1600 wheels, a Fizik Vento Argo R1 saddle and carbon Deda Superzero RS bars retails for €4,799 but whoever specced our sample bike was rather more click-happy with the options list. A 12-speed Ultegra Di2 groupset, 50mm carbon DT Swiss ARC 1400 Dicut wheels, 28mm Vittoria Corsa Pro tyres, Zipp SL Speed seatpost and a pair of Arundel Stainless Steel cages inflates the price to €6819.01. If you’re a UK customer you’ll have to pay €170 shipping plus VAT and import duty, bringing the total to around €7,848, or £6,499. Standert will ship frames to the US, but not entire bikes.

Our size 58 Kreissäge RS review bike, including stainless steel cages, tipped the scales at 8.66kg, which is not porky but also no featherweight.

The ride

First things first, I’ve got to admit that I don’t like the ‘Get it Green’ colour of our review bike. The flat, dark green paintwork works fine on an old Jag - British Racing Green and all that - but it looks dated here. The gold decals add a bit of bling, but the pink lettering simply jars. Similarly, the stainless-steel cages are at odds with the gold.

The other available paint options, to my eye at least, really pop. Why didn’t they send us one in See Ya Silver, Peel Off Orange or Team Pink? Admittedly, aesthetic choices are completely personal, so I accept that my criticism is utterly meaningless.

During a quick pre-ride chat, Maxe Faschina, Standert’s head of product, cautioned me about the Kreissäge RS’ ride. “It’s an aluminium race bike,” said Faschina, “built specifically for short, intense crit races, it’s not supposed to be comfortable.”

Certainly, the bike is super stiff and very direct. Putting the power down results in instant acceleration, and the smallest of inputs to the Superzero RS bars results in an immediate change of course. It really is that reactive, yet it’s also beautifully balanced. I found myself wishing for long, sweeping bends to go on forever, unable to resist the voice in my head that urged “faster, faster…”

Tight bends and sudden changes in direction don’t phase the Kreissäge RS either; as you’d expect of a crit bike, it’s in its element chopping and changing, weaving and darting. As I’ve already established, it’s no featherweight, but its stiffness does compensate. I’ve no idea how efficient the drivetrain and frameset combo is, but when climbing or sprinting, it felt like most of the watts I was putting through the pedals were reaching the back wheel. Which was reassuring.

The contact points are top-notch. I’ve long been a fan of the short-nosed Fizik Vento Argo R1, a saddle that allows you to comfortably ride ‘on the rivet’ for an extended period. The Deda Superzero RS bars are new to me, but I found them similarly satisfying, and they suit the character of the bike with their aero-inspired deep flat tops and large RS branding.

Was Faschina right about the ride quality? Not exactly. Yes, the frame is stiff, but the Deda bars and Zipp carbon seat post subdued road chatter and added a decent amount of compliance. The glorious wheel and tyre combination probably made the most significant impact – the beautifully supple cotton Corsa Pros, pumped to 70 psi, never cease to impress - so much so that I’d love to try the lesser-specced base model as a comparison. The Kreissäge RS is no feather mattress endurance bike, but it’s versatile enough to conquer some long rides in relative comfort.

Value and conclusions

Speccing the correct cockpit, seat stem, wheels and tyres is the key to unlocking the Kreissäge RS’ full potential, and this is the rub. Attack Standert’s configurator with too much enthusiastic abandon and the law of diminishing returns dictates it’s easy to end up with an expensive bike that won’t be significantly better than cheaper competition from the likes of Specialized.

It’s hard to ignore that a similarly-specced Allez Sprint Comp costs a whopping £1,400 less than the base Kreissäge RS. Same Shimano 105 groupset, similar alloy wheels and an aluminium frame. Some of that money can be accounted for - the Standert has desirable scandium tubing, a better cockpit and a nicer saddle. The rest? It must be in the Italian manufacturing, which rightly or wrongly, holds more allure than a factory-finished product from the Far East.

Specs

• Frame: Scandium Aluminium
• Groupset: Shimano Ultegra Di2 R8100 12spd
• Chainrings: Compact 50–34
• Cassette: 11–30
• Brakes: Flatmount 160mm front and 140mm rear
• Cranks: 172.5mm
• Wheelset: DT Swiss ARC 1400 DICUT® 50mm
• Tyres: Vittoria Corsa Pro Tan Wall (28c)
• Stem: Deda Superbox DCR
• Handlebars: Deda Superzero RS Carbon 38cm (c-c)
• Bar tape: Fizik Vento Microtex 2mm Black
• Seat post: Zipp SL Speed
• Saddle: Fizik Vento Argo R1 140m

The best mudguards/fenders for gravel bikes are well-fitted and sturdily made. They reduce wheel spray for you, as well as preventing grit (and worse) from getting into your eyes and mouth. Mudguards will also protect your back and feet from the worst of the wet and muddy stuff on a ride and extend the life of your kit by reducing contact with grit-degrading debris.

The flipside, however, couldn't be worse: mudguards that rub tyres no matter how much adjusting is done, create a front-wheel trip hazard when undertaking more technical sections, and actually damage paintwork or frame materials from abrasion friction.

Testing a pair of Zéfal Shield G50 gravel bike-specific mudguards on the Fara F/Gravel in mid-winter felt like a game of roulette on wheels.

Construction

Designed specifically for gravel bikes, the plastic (Technopolymer) front and rear Zéfal Shield G50 mudguards are, according to the brand, suitable for 650B/28"/700C tyres. To ensure the best fit for your size wheels, the guards have adjustable lengths, with three mud flaps of 20, 60 and 120 mm lengths to choose from.

Measuring 55mm wide, Zéfal say the Shield G50 mudguard is capable of providing coverage for tyre widths of up to 48mm, which will fit all bar the largest of gravel bike tyres.

Two robust stays secure each guard in place. These stays connect via adjustable herth joints to rubber pads, similar to old-fashioned brakes. They are fastened to the bike's rear seat stays and front forks using a silicone-coated hook-and-eye MD-strap. According to Zéfal, these straps should fit tube diameters of 10 to 55 mm at the front (210 mm long) and 10 to 32 mm at the rear (130 mm long).

Compared to the slender stays on other clip-on brands, such as the SKS Speedrocker fenders these look positively industrial and would not be out of place on a suspension bridge.

This simplistic design does mean the guards are rather chunky in size, the front measuring 461 x 54 x 210 mm(L/W/H) and the rear 660 x 54 x 210 mm (L/W/H), with the 120mm mudflap on. The weight tips the scales at 195g for the front and rear 250g (with mud flap 120 mm).

Fitting

When it comes to fitting mudguards, I generally adopt an 'expect the worst and hope for the best' approach. So, I was pleasantly surprised to discover how easy it was to fit the Zéfal version. Using just a small cross-head screwdriver and a 5mm Allen key, the fitting took less than 30 minutes.

It would have taken 20 minutes had I been able to locate the tiny screwdriver required to change the adjustable flap size, please note - it's not part of an average bike tool kit set up.

The robust design means minimal twisting out of shape, making fitting on one side and then the other a breeze. My hesitations about pairing the pad shape with the tubing shapes on the Fara F/Gravel seemed unfounded. While not exactly glove-like, they felt very firm once secured with the straps.

Once that was done, the guards were angled and the herth joint tightened to secure them in place. Thanks to its gear-like construction, the joint stayed in place while I tightened it, making the Sheild G50's the quickest, easiest, and neatest mudguard fitting experience I've ever had.

The Ride

No matter how easy it is to fit a pair of mudguards, the real test is whether they stay put once on.

I was pleased not to hear any evident rattle of rub on the maiden voyage, but that was just a quick road loop to preempt the usual fender faff re-fit requirement of first rides.

So far, so good, but riding on relatively smooth road surfaces compared to the off-road terrain of UK-style gravel was going to be a big ask for any mudguard, especially a clip-on.

Next up, I started to venture onto more adventurous surfaces. On cinder trails and more benign off-road rides, they again proved rock solid.

The mudguards proved to do a great job at deflecting the muck and spray front and back, as well as a semi-decent job of protecting the bike, although if you really want full seat tube and drivetrain protection you'll need to look in the direction of something like the Portland Design Works Full Metal fenders.

Confidence growing, I braved a truly epic off-road adventure to really put the Shield G50's to the test on some more gnarly Peak District (UK) terrain, when my daughter and I decided to take on the well-known 'Pike'.

A mother and child on drop bar bikes hauling their way up an increasingly technical climb isn't something most hikers, bikers - and, in one instance, a farmer - witness too often. All had forewarned us about how challenging it was up ahead, and questioned if we really were on the proper bikes to tackle such terrain.

Undeterred we pressed on. While some of the more challenging sections saw us adopt a hike-a-bike approach, I was so surprised at how well and far I was able to get. The shorter style of mudguard at the front voided the risk of foot overlap, vital on these front wheel twitching sections.

On the faster sections, I wasn't even aware of their impeding progress, perhaps the fastest riders out there would perceive a slowing of speed due to their drag, but mudguards are designed for comfort. If going fast is always your aim, then you might find something like the Ass Savers' Mudder Mini fender is probably the best option for you.

The proverbial elephant in the room, however, is a mudguard spray etiquette for other riders. As with all clip-on guards, their short design will mean that a rider behind will likely be worse off for sitting on your wheel. But bear in mind these are specifically for gravel use, where wheel sucking is more the exception than the rule.

Value and Conclusion

I must admit, I initially judged the Zéfal Shield G50 mudguards by looks when they landed with me. They aren't the most alluring pair of guards on the market, but when have mudguards ever been particularly attractive? I'd personally forgo looks over ability and performance any day of the week.

The only thing that makes them ick for me is their impact on the rider behind, and I'd struggle to use them on a group ride. Other than that, they are top-notch.

Easy to fit, true staying power and doing an excellent job of rider protection for the reasonable price tag of £40/$59.00 for the set.

The reason for wider tyres is simple: more volume allows for lower pressures, which combined with thin, flexible sidewalls bring increased traction and comfort as well as decreased rolling resistance. Because pressures are low, the sidewalls are less prone to cuts and punctures (if you’re skeptical about this, imagine a full balloon vs. a partially deflated one: the full one will pop if you look at it the wrong way while the deflated one will thwart even a pair of scissors).

The Schwalbe G-One RX Pro tyre slots into Schwalbe’s new gravel Pro series as the most aggressively treaded of the three. It is designed to maximize grip in rough terrain and muddy conditions while still rolling well and clearing debris efficiently. It is available in three sizes: 40, 45 and 50 mm (as tested here).

Design and construction

The G-One RX Pro uses the same carcass construction and compounds as Schwalbe’s MTB tyres. What has changed is the size (they’re smaller) and the tread patterns, which were designed specifically for gravel riding. The RX Pro features dual compound tread (harder in the center, softer on the shoulders) developed in conjunction with Schwalbe-sponsored professional athletes.

The RX Pro has a chevron center tread with interlocking intermediate knobs that abut longer, alternating side lugs. All of the knobs are spaced out to aid with mud clearance, but together they form a cohesive shape that keeps tread on the ground regardless of the angle of the tyre.

The carcass design has been updated from previous gravel models with a wider protective layer under the tread. There are two sidewall colour choices (Black and Transparent) on offer.

Previously, Schwalbe only offered gravel tyres up to 45mm but that’s no longer the case with the introduction of this new line. When I asked my Schwalbe contact about tyre width, they said: “With the growth of the gravel market and the trend growing wider, we’ve started to offer all Pro line tyres in sizes 35mm-50mm widths in 5mm increments. As frame clearances evolve we will most likely see tyres going even wider in volume.”

I’m predicting a wave of 55mm tyres in 2027; mark your calendar.

Specs

• Name: Schwalbe G-One RX Pro
• Price: $88 USD
• Available Sizes: 40, 45, 50 mm (model tested)
• Weight: 619 grams
• Colours: Black, Transparent (Tan)
• Hookless compatible: Yes

The ride

After unboxing, the first step I take when testing tyres is to weigh them. Schwalbe lists the G-One RX weight at 615 grams. My test tyres came in slightly heavier than that, but not by much.

Installation was smooth: The trickiest bit was at the beginning—fighting the first bead onto the rim took some effort, but once that was complete the second bead popped over easily by hand, and my little air compressor had no trouble getting the tyres to seat fully. It’s rare to find tyres that install this easily. On 25 mm internal rims, the RX Pro tyres measure 49.5 mm.

Once I installed sealant and inflated the tyres up to about 40 PSI to sit overnight, I then dropped the pressure using my highly calibrated “squeeze test.” Silca’s tyre pressure calculator corroborated my approach almost exactly, spitting out an answer of 22/23 PSI based on my inputs (weight, tyre size, and expected terrain). I have found Silca’s calculator to run a bit high in the past, but this seemed pretty spot on. On a rootless route, I could probably go lower.

My first ride on the tyres took me through Seattle’s quieter neighborhoods to a park in the city that contains a mix of loose gravel and some singletrack. The ground was damp but not soaked. On mostly chip-sealed and concrete-paneled roads on the way there, I felt like I was floating. Sometimes, it takes a while to find this pressure sweetspot, but I got there from the first pedal strokes. Off road, I was very impressed with how they performed on both singletrack and gravel paths, providing the confidence I’m accustomed to on a mountain bike.

On subsequent testing days, I had trouble getting these tyres to lose traction even in loose sandy soil. The tread pattern and thin casing really do a good job connecting with the ground. I also felt comfortable leaning the bike over on pavement, without experiencing any squirminess sometimes present with knobby tyres on tarmac.

Whether or not the dual compound helps with rolling resistance remains an open question. I’m not sure that the harder rubber actually makes the tyres any faster on pavement. It should wear better (ergo, last longer) but it probably makes the tyres slower everywhere except on a steel drum test. Schwalbe uses a smooth drum roller for its testing, so it’s not surprising that this is the direction the company went with the design. I have some doubts about this testing method, as I think it is not reflective of real-world riding conditions.

I was curious to know whether or not Schwalbe tested these new gravel tyres against its quite fast-rolling Thunder Burt XC model. Here’s what I heard back when I asked: “We do not have any direct comparisons between the Thunder Burt and G-One RX Pro to share. We utilize specific testing protocols for our categories based on their use case. So, the Thunder Burt and G-One RX are tested at different air pressures and speed, making the numbers we have inaccurate for direct comparison.”

In addition to spending some time on the RX model, I also had the opportunity to test out the new RS tyres, a semi-slick intended for smoother roads. It has a directional tread, depending on which wheel you install it on, to prioritize either grip or rolling speed. I got on similarly well on these tyres and think that one of the most intriguing benefits about this suite of tyres is the ability to mix and match tread patterns between the three. With identical sizes and casings, it’s very easy to swap in a grippy front and slick rear, or any other variation one wishes to try, and have them perform well in concert.

Value and conclusion

Not everyone needs or wants 50mm (2.00 inch) tyres, but if you have a bike with sufficient clearance, I highly recommend trying them out. The more we collectively understand about the science underpinning rolling resistance, the more that wide tyres seem like a no-brainer. The key, however, is in the casing. It’s easy to focus on width, but width only matters if the casing is supple enough to soak up variations in the ground. This takes time and experimentation on different terrain and at different pressures to understand. And there are downsides to wider tyres: more weight and additional aerodynamic drag. Compared to the increase in rolling speed and comfort, however, I'm inclined to focus on the positives.

Schwalbe has done an excellent job with this tyre and, more broadly, this series. Using these three tread patterns in combination, and mixing and matching as needed, should allow riders to optimize traction for any gravel ride or race they might undertake. It’s really all I can ask for from a tyre. And while they are expensive, good tyres are always worth it.