The MAAP Aeon LS jersey uses the same Polartec Delta material that the brand debuted on the Aeon short sleeve in 2025. It’s made up of polyester and spandex, but also lyocell, a sustainable fibre made from wood pulp.

Design details

The Polartec Delta material aims to be highly breathable and fast drying for enhanced evaporative cooling. In some ways it's similar to Merino wool, allowing for greater insulation when cool, but greater moisture wicking when you're sweating The structure of the material is partially perforated, but less so than the Pro Air 3.0 jersey in MAAP’s range.

The long sleeves should help improve cooling if evaporative heat loss is possible, i.e. not overly humid, as well as featuring a UPF 15 protection. This means that only 1/15^th of the sun’s UV rays can penetrate, so 6.6%, giving it a pass as rated for sun protection. While SPF is a time-based protective rating, UPF is constant, so does not deteriorate over the duration of a ride.

Only the pockets and hem feature a thicker material, used to keep the base of the jersey in place and pocket contents secure. There are three standard pockets, with a zip up valuables one as well, all featuring a bonded hem edge at the top, which gives a smooth and sleek fit. They are paired with a folded hem at the neck and sleeves for secure and longer lasting fit. It’s a form fitting jersey, but not quite as r'ace cut' as the brand's Pro Aero and Race line is.

Sizes range from XS to XXL, while four colours are available. Temperature range is recommended as 18-35˚ C / 64-95˚F

Performance

The MAAP Aeon LS has proven to be rather effective across a range of conditions. The suggested temperature range is a bit off in my opinion, but then I do tend to run rather hot. I’ve found that between 14-26˚C / 57-79˚F has been a good range for this jersey, but above this it starts to get a bit too toasty.

In cooler temps the jersey still provides enough of a layer of insulation but can easily be paired with a mesh base layer for added protection. The mesh like structure also works brilliantly when it comes to heat dissipation, and I’ve not found it uncomfortable in those higher reaches. This level of breathability also makes it superb for higher intensity rides, especially where the temperature is more changeable - either early morning starts when the heat ramps up, or evening fast paced group rides when it's cooler.

When it comes to very hot temperatures I find that pretty much any garment has its limits Like many jerseys the Aeon LS struggles with humidity. The moisture wicking and transfer only works if the external air carries less moisture than the layer above your skin, which in high humidity is not the case. But in higher humidity additional fabric across the skin in a long sleeve jersey makes it feel warmer in my experience.

However, for non-humid riding, a big benefit of the long sleeve variant though over shorter sleeves is the increased UV protection. Your arms are pretty much always in direct sun exposure, so having a UPF protective layer is far better for your long-term skin health, especially if you aren’t in the habit of reapplying suncream. This is however slightly at odds with the lower neckline of the jersey.

However, the neckline is comfortable, especially when breathing heavily during higher intensity. Meanwhile the raw cut and folded hems on the neck and the sleeves are smooth, not bulky, and provide zero irritation. In the short sleeve variant, I had an issue of the fold coming undone on the sleeve as the glue failed; no such issue with the long sleeve where it looks like some stitching has been added.

I appreciate the length of this jersey. I’m rather lanky, and the body and the sleeves are plenty long enough without being excessively so. I’m not a fan of short bodied jerseys as they also tend to situate the pockets high up on the back making them a faff to access. Again, no such issue here.

As for those pockets, they feature a flat-top design which gives a very sleek look when they are empty but are still easily accessible. They’re spacious enough for plenty of tools and spares, while the zip-up side pocket has a longer tab making it easy to use.

Value

I do like the Aeon LS jersey, but it is £190 / $240 for essentially a mesh jersey that can be used in a broad operating range of temperatures. It features no specific aero qualities and outprices a lot of very effective long sleeve jerseys for warmer conditions. Options such as the Rapha Pro Team Lightweight LS jersey come in at just £145 / $200 by comparison, while the Assos Mille GT LS S11 Evo jersey is £135 / $180 (We reviewed the short sleeve version).

Obviously, there are similarly priced competitors. The likes of the Q36.5 Dottore Pro LS jersey (£200 / $270), Pas Normal Studios Mechanism Pro LS (£220 / $290), and Castelli Corretto (£175 / $210) promise similar benefits at a similar price. I am however a big fan of the Polartec Delta fabric, and I think it does allow for a jersey that is effective towards the lower end of the recommended temperature spectrum as well as rather hot dry heat conditions.

But when it comes to jerseys, if aero is not the focus, I find it very hard to justify prices that exceed £150, let alone near the £200 mark. Especially when you consider the Rapha Pro Team Aero LS jersey (£225 / $295) and Assos Equipe RS S11 LS (£185 / $260) are both pretty good in warmer conditions but also feature aero features to go some way further to justifying a price that high.

Tech spec

• Price: £190/ $240
• Pockets: 4
• Fit: Race
• Type: Long sleeve
• Colours: Chalk, Slate, Black Musk
• Sizes: XS, S, M, L, XL, XXL

The 52/58 Superlight Aero wheelset from No.6 has plenty of racing pedigree. They are ridden by both the DAS Hutchinson UCI women’s team and Ineos Grenadiers development team, CAMS Majaco. Indeed, if you look closely enough, you'll spot some WorldTour teams using blacked-out versions so as not to upset any official sponsors.

Design details

The No.6 52/58 form is part of the Superlight Aero range of wheels from No.6, part of its 2026 ProjectSpeed, as it calls it. These comprise 28, 42, 48, 52, 58 and 65mm rims profiles, with this specific combination being a 52mm front and 58mm rear.

The front wheel measures 32mm external width and 25mm internal, while the rear uses 30mm external width and 24mm internal; these wider internal measurements are becoming commonplace among the best road bike wheels. The claimed weight for all of this is just 1,267g for the pair; on my scales, they came out at 1,281g, including the rim tape and a Shimano HG 11/12 speed hub.

The rims feature a lovely gloss finish and are made of a combination of Toray T700 and T800 carbon fibre. They are tubeless, as most road wheels are now, but still use hooked rather than hookless rims. Maximum tyre pressure is 110psi, and a 110kg weight limit is also imposed.

Moving inwards from the rims, the spoke nipples are external and Aerotitanium Alloy. Carbon spokes lace into these. These differ between the front and rear. The front uses 16 spokes measuring 3.8mm in diameter, arranged in a two-cross 1:1 ratio, while the rear uses 20 spokes measuring 5mm and is laced in the same two-cross 1:1 ratio.

The hubs are Zero Gravity v.3 and as standard come with Tripeak Ceramic Bearings and a 45-tooth ratchet engagement. Freehub options cover the full spectrum, with Shimano HG, MSR, SRAM XDR and Campagnolo N3W. No.6 says the wheels perform best with 28-30mm tyre widths, but can use 28-35mm. White and black decals are available.

Performance

Fitting tyres to these wheels was pretty easy for the most part, depending on the tyres. Vittoria Corsa Pro Speed slotted on very easily, while getting the bead of the Pirelli P Zero Race TLR S-LR tyres proved a little tighter. Both, however, pumped up and seated fairly well. As a rule, I prefer a hooked rim for road riding, given I opt for pressures above 75psi to deliver a more consistent cornering sensation.

Regardless of the tyre choice, out on the road the wheels feel rapid. The rims are wide, so they work very well with 28-30mm tyres which tend to sit nicely flush with the rim profile, and do tend to provide greater aerodynamic performance.

The 52/58mm depths are reasonable; I personally prefer a deeper one given I am a taller and heavier rider, but this combination did feel quick. Racing in my local handicap road race series, averaging speeds in excess of 45km/h, these wheels proved no barrier.

I used them as part of a wind tunnel test with a few different frames, and against a set of Vision Metron SL 60 wheels with the same tyres, the No.6 52/58 were faster at every speed and yaw angle across three different frames. While this is a limited comparison, the Metron wheels are well-regarded and feature a deeper profile so might be expected to be faster at higher speeds and yaw angles.

Weight is another area where these wheels perform admirably; 1,281g for a deep-section wheelset, including valves and tape, is certainly competitive. And it shows out on the road. On fairly consistent inclines, whether shallow or steep, the wheels seemed to hold speed well. Even on steeper climbs requiring a higher power output, they got up to speed quickly. I personally find that well-laced steel spokes with a slightly higher count can be a bit stiffer, and while carbon-spoked hoops aren't a benchmark for lateral stiffness, these are by no means floppy.

That in itself isn’t the worst thing, as the wheels have a reasonable amount of compliance; riding across the broken surfaces that make up a good deal of the roads I train and race on locally, they aren't jarring at all. I still have my reservations about carbon spokes however, as I’ve had stones or debris ping up when riding in a bunch, and if they ever impacted a carbon spoke I don’t fancy its chances. Fortunately, spares are supplied, both front and rear, given the different spoke widths used. External nipples also mean they can be fitted with limited hassle.

I like the inclusion of ceramic bearings as standard. These are a marginal gain, but it's in wheel hubs where they make the most sense to me. Pulley wheels or bottom brackets aren't always turning, whereas if you are moving, the wheels are spinning, so there is more to gain from ceramic bearings. They, of course, need to be good quality, and the races need to match them, or issues can arise over time. However, across the 1,500km of testing so far, the bearings roll well, and there is no play in them. The 45-tooth ratchet also engages quickly, proving to be especially efficient in bunch races where I find myself on and off the power more frequently.

Finally, a very subjective element: I think they look great. I don’t like matte carbon wheels; they get dirty quickly and are a pain to clean, as water marks and oil add imperfections. The gloss finish on the No.6 wheels looks fantastic, similar to the stunning Campagnolo C Lux finish.

Value

At £1,699 / $2,199, these are by no means cheap. However, there is good reason for the higher price than you might expect from Chinese-brand wheels: more research and development. Wind tunnel testing isn't cheap, and that development cost gets passed on to consumers. That means this wheelset costs more than the Scope R4 (£1,498) or Hunt 5AM Limitless (£1,699). But that is not where these wheels are marketed to compete.

Compared with the Scope Artech 6 (£3,498 / $4,398), Enve SES 4.5 Pro (£3,999 / $3,750), Zipp 454 NSW (£3,400 / $4,200), and Princeton Wake (£4,000 / $4,275), the No.6 52/58 starts to look like good value. The weight is comparable, the aero performance is based on some independent testing, while ceramic bearings are included as standard, which is not always a given. Outliers include the Hunt 5AM Limitless UD spokes, which are £1,999 / $2,599 and very similar on paper, but overall the No.6 52/58 offer pretty impressive value compared to their rivals.

A bonus for the No.6 is that there is no import fee with the wheels, and spares are easy to get. However, the lack of dealers in the UK at present may put some riders off, while Hunt is renowned for its customer service in the UK.

Tech spec

• Price: £1,699 / $2,199
• Weight: 1,267g
• Hubset: Zero Gravity v.3
• Freehub options: Shimano HG11/12, SRAM XDR, Campagnolo
• Rim depth: 52/58mm front/rear
• Internal rim width: 25mm
• Spoke count: 16/20 front/rear
• Rim: Hooked

The Pas Normal Studios Mechanism Pro bib shorts represent the pinnacle of PNS’s best cycling shorts range, utilising the lightest weight and fastest moisture-wicking materials in its range to produce a pair of bib shorts designed for use across high-intensity and hot-weather riding.

Design details

The shorts use a structurally mapped, variable 4D-stretch fabric that hugs the body for a ‘second skin’ feel. This material is incredibly lightweight and wicks moisture quickly for the demands of high-intensity riding or racing, and it's also designed to resist abrasion.

The hems feature a woven-in, silicone-free gripper to keep the shorts in place without the risk of irritation. Meanwhile, the straps use a very lightweight mesh structure to support the shoulders while improving breathability. A radio pocket is stitched into the back of the straps.

The pad is the four-layer ultralight foam chamois that PNS uses across its range of shorts. It features a variable number of foam layers, with more under the sit bones and fewer as you move outwards. This design avoids bulk around soft tissue areas, while the upper is antibacterial and low-friction to reduce discomfort on longer rides.

Five colour options are available, as well as this PAS edition, and sizes span XXS to XXL.

Performance

The Mechanism Pro shorts feel very soft and lightweight. The material is incredibly thin but not see-through, and it feels very soft against the skin. The woven-in grippers keep the shorts in place, impressively given the low compression around the hems. This theme continues up to the bib straps and rear panel, which are again incredibly thin and lightweight but still supportive.

Together, these make exceptionally good bib shorts for hotter environments. During peak heatwaves, these are the shorts I reach for when temperatures exceed 35˚C. They are also a favourite to use on the turbo for higher-intensity sessions thanks to the higher level of moisture wicking.

They don’t offer the same compression as the Mechanism shorts, but they are still plenty supportive for higher-intensity efforts.

One area where the shorts can struggle a bit is a side effect of one of their strengths. The shorts have brilliant moisture wicking, which again improves warm-weather performance. However, the moisture transfer makes sweat very visible on longer rides. In the black colourway this is not apparent, but the Iron Grey version suffers in this area quite badly.

I’m still a big fan of the chamois. The graduated layers of foam padding, based on the amount of support required, mean the pad isn't bulky, but it still provides good cushioning and vibration dampening under the sit bone area. The lower volume around the rest of the pad means that there is no excessive bulk. Meanwhile, the antibacterial upper layer and fast-drying nature of the pad aid performance on longer, hotter rides. Overall, I've used these shorts on rides in exceptionally warm weather for five hours or more. In these scenarios, the shorts performed exceptionally well.

Value

At £260/ $350, these are certainly a premium-priced pair of bib shorts. Given their high moisture-wicking and performance focus, comparable options include the Rapha Pro Team III shorts (£250), Assos Equipe Bolide RSR S11 (£295), MAAP Pro Bib 2.0 (£260), and Q36.5 Dottore Clima Pro (£300). However, outliers such as the Castelli Free Aero Race S (£199) undercut those options by a fair amount.

The standout performance element of the Mechanism Pro bib shorts is their performance in warmer conditions, as they excel beyond many of the competitors, and the only ones that come close cost a fair chunk more, with the Assos and Q36.5 offerings, plus the Rapha Ghost.

However, the shorts don’t offer anything particularly exciting compared to something like the Bolide RSR S11, as its pad is truly exceptional, especially in warm weather or in a more aggressive riding position. I also personally do like the greater compression of the standard Mechanism shorts, while they do a better job of not showing sweat in lighter colours.

These are certainly a good pair of shorts; they just don’t excite me particularly or stand out in the crowd. But at the same time, they are the pair I tend to reach for on hot rides and turbo rides.

Tech spec

• Price: £260/ $350
• Chamois style: Race
• Storage: None
• Leg type: Shorts
• Colours: Black (tested), Brown, Grey, Blue, Green, White
• Sizes: XXS, XS, S, M, L, XL, XXL

The Caad platform is known for its sprightly performance and robust build quality, which has endeared it to many fans over the years. However, with the Caad13, Cannondale took a risk, designing a bike that looked and felt more like the carbon SuperSix Evo, diluting its heritage and design architecture despite retaining an aluminium construction. While this didn't ruin the bike's dynamic character, it did move away from the hallmark features of the original recipe.

To rekindle the original's traits, Cannondale redesigned the frame once again, returning it to its roots. The new blueprint blends past and future, paying homage to the double-diamond architecture without pandering to contemporary trends or aerodynamic principles.

Cannondale says its intentions were “to create a bike that stays true to aluminium instead of trying to mimic carbon shapes, while building on the material’s natural strengths to deliver a fast, responsive ride.”

The real question however lies in whether there's still a place for aluminium road bikes in today’s aero- and carbon-fibre-obsessed landscape, and more importantly, can the Caad14 deliver both as a racer and everyday riding rig?

Design details

The focus of the new Caad was to engineer an aluminium frame with no carbon-fibre bike design influences. That meant returning to classic angles and tubes that shun truncated aerofoils in favour of more retro themes – and the Caad looks superb as a result.

The frame is constructed from Cannondale’s proprietary SmartForm C1 alloy tubing, oversized and with smoothed-out welds so clean they’re hard to see. In fact, during my testing, many passersby couldn't tell the bike was aluminium and were convinced it was a carbon-fibre frame. I like the clean look, but intentionally leaving the welding beads visible as an aesthetic choice would have reinforced Cannondale’s “not carbon, not sorry” tagline. The welds, however, are more visible on the raw-alloy finish of the range-topping Caad14 1.

While I appreciate the Cherry Lacquer colour and chevron overlay on the toptube, I feel Cannondale played it safe with the paint and graphic design on the full builds. The Rally Red frameset colourway or Team Dream livery is more in line with the Caad vibe, and I feel the brand should have run with those designs across the range for maximum visual impact. The current full-build colours are, dare I say, a bit too boring and don't match the Caad's personality or modus operandi for that matter.

The double-diamond design features high-mounted seat stays reminiscent of the Caad12 and second-generation SuperSix Evo – a refreshing visual that boldly middle-fingers the dropped seatstay and aerodynamic cookie-cutter facades of contemporary road race bike design. While the premise of the Caad14 is largely its aluminium construction, the fork and seatpost are made of carbon, a move not just to reduce weight but also to improve ride feel and rear compliance.

Weight was not a massive focus for the Caad14 project, but the bike is not what you’d call portly – of course, some component choices have inched its gram count up, but also helped keep the price relatively low - notably the wheels. As such, our Caad14 weighed in at 8.9kg in size 54cm.

The lack of mudguard mounting hardware points to its race-bent design, which also sees UDH compatibility, a switch from press-fit BB30A to the threaded 68mm BSA bottom bracket standard, and an increase in tyre clearance (up from 30mm to 32mm).

In terms of sizing, there are six options spanning 48, 51, 54, 56, 58, 61cm, which are two sizes less than the outgoing model. The geometry is very racy and not too far removed from the current SuperSix Evo, nor its predecessor, for that matter.

In size 54cm, the Caad14 matches a 71.3-degree head angle to a 73.3-degree seat tube angle - not a far cry from the SuperSix Evo - while the stack and reach figures are basically identical at a respective 540- and 386mm. The 415mm chainstay and 58mm trail are the same across all sizes, with the latter matching the SuperSix Evo.

Specifications

For the money, you get a decent mix of components, including a SRAM Rival AXS groupset with a 48/35T, 10-36T drivetrain. There is an alloy Vision Trimax Aero bar and a Cannondale Conceal C1 stem, along with a 27.2mm Cannondale Save carbon seatpost with an external clamp and a Prologo Nago RS STN saddle.

If there’s one area that needs addressing, and I felt the same way about the Synapse Carbon 4 I tested last year, it’s the DT Swiss wheels, the E1800 Spline model in this case. Sure, they’re durable and reliable, but they’re heavy and hold back an otherwise sound package. At this price point, I'd have expected at least a set of DT Swiss ER 1600 Spline carbon wheels.

I suspect prospective competitive riders may want to buy a separate wheelset if they want to race. Still, a carbon wheelset would have done wonders to bolster value, not to mention feel and communication, too.

Performance

It’s been a while since I last tested an aluminium road bike, and the Caad14 delivered in every respect. It’s a lively, agile machine, with the firm ride quality to match.

Our Caad14 test bike came fitted with 28mm Vittoria Rubino Pro tyres and inner tubes, so there was only so much I could do to improve plushness and soften imperfections. While alloy frames are known for their firm ride quality and stiff frame properties, I also feel relocating the seatstays into an upright, more traditional position has perhaps heightened road buzz.

In terms of straight-line speed, the Caad14 is perfectly adept at going fast – don’t let its round tubing and old-school architecture fool you. It accelerates well and does well to maintain momentum thanks to its responsive underpinnings. Sure, you can feel the system weight on the climbs, but it doesn't negatively impact the experience – in fact, I was very impressed by the way the Caad14 responded to out-of-saddle accelerations up punchy climbs.

The sporty ride character and alloy construction do come with some drawbacks, particularly the firm ride quality, but you can mitigate this to some degree by fitting wider rubber (the Caad14 can accommodate up to 32mm-wide tyres) and lowering tyre pressures. It’s super-stable during tight, technical cornering manoeuvres, showing its prowess when darting from left to right, and scything down descents with poise and precision.

In many ways, the Caad14's geometry flatters the rider, but it's not perfect, and some of this might be down to the wheels. Despite the durability they might offer over a season, the heavy alloy wheels ruin the bike's overall dynamic character. In fact, they feel more like a cost-saving measure than a genuine consideration. Thankfully, this can be upgraded, and I expect many prospective buyers to do so as their first port of call.

Value

Overall, the specification list is solid, and the Caad14 delivers a sporty, detailed experience that inspires confidence in the twisties and descents. The geometry is racy, which might limit its appeal somewhat, but for the pure racer and rider wanting a sprightly, durable machine, the Caad14 is a compelling choice.

However, some concerns remain. Some might argue the lack of mudguard integration and carbon wheels let down an otherwise sound package, especially at this price point – and I tend to agree. At £3,700/$3,999/€3,999, carbon wheels are non-negotiable, especially when you consider the increasing value threat posed by Chinese race bikes rolling off far-east production lines.

That said, the Caad14 range is diverse, and if price is a concern, there's a £2,500/$2,499/€2,499 model available. It keeps the carbon fork of its stablemates and is available in two classic colourways - black or white - but ditches electronic shifting for mechanical Shimano 105. As the entry point into Caad ownership, most of the components are aluminium, including the wheels, cockpit, and seatpost, which will no doubt increase the weight, but at this price, there’s scope to upgrade parts down the line as you need them.

Scoring breakdown

Tech spec

• Price: £3,700/ $3,999/ €3,999
• Brand: Cannondale
• Frame: Caad14, SmartForm C1 Premium Alloy
• Fork: Caad14, carbon
• Weight: 8.9kg (actual, 54cm)
• Sizes: 48, 51, 54, 56, 58, 61cm
• Levers: SRAM Rival AXS
• Brakes: SRAM Rival, 160/160mm front/rear
• Rear derailleur: SRAM Rival AXS
• Front derailleur: SRAM Rival AXS
• Crankset:  SRAM Rival 48/35T
• Bottom bracket: SRAM DUB BSA
• Cassette: SRAM Rival 10-36T
• Chain: SRAM Rival
• Wheels: DT Swiss E1800 Spline
• Tyres: Vittoria Rubino Pro IV 28mm
• Bar/stem: Vision Trimax Aero, Cannondale C1 Conceal
• Seatpost: Cannondale Save Carbon, 27.2x350mm
• Saddle: Prologo Nago RS STN

Not all of you will have heard of Scope Cycling, the Netherlands-based wheel brand, but it produces a range of premium-priced, high-quality wheels with lots of technical innovations intended to increase speed and lower weight, a goal most of the best road bikes wheels seek to achieve.

Scope offers three distinct road wheel ranges: Sport, Race and Artech in a variety of depths, with Artech being the most technologically advanced. Scope also makes all-road, gravel and triathlon wheels.

It’s worth noting that Ineos Grenadiers, a team not known to take their equipment choices lightly, use Scope Artech wheels on their Pinarello bikes in the WorldTour, lending further cachet to the brand and its products.

Design details

As you’d imagine for a set of professionally endorsed wheels, there is a lot to talk about with the Artechs. The first thing that caught my eye on spec sheet was the rider weight limit, or the lack of it. Most high-end wheels I can think of have a system weight limit somewhere around 110-130kg, and super lightweight wheels are often less than this; for example Hunt’s 963g Hill Climb SL Disc wheelset is limited to 95kg (and is for tubular tyres), yet the Artech 2.0s have no weight limit at all and are tubeless-ready with hooked rims. Impressive.

Even more impressive is the wheelset's claimed weight of 965g; the test set tipped the scales at 981g including rim tape, so the 965g claim is totally believable.

The Artech range all feature a very distinctive 3D 'fish scale' pattern on the rims, said to increase aerodynamic efficiency and reduce drag, although with only 22mm of rim depth to play with I’d imagine the effect on the Artech 2s is minimal. The blunt rims have an internal width of 23mm, and look almost semi-circular in shape, with their 28.8mm external width. Scope says that they are optimised for 28mm tyres.

Straight-pull, bladed Carbonlite Aerospokes lace the rims to the hubs, with 18 at the front and 24 at the rear. These are laced in a radial pattern on the non-disc side at the front and crossed elsewhere and the nipples are hidden in the rim.

The hubs have a unique, almost organic look, with soft, curved spoke structures that reminded me of coral. Made from Scalmalloy, a high-strength aluminium-magnesium-scandium alloy, using 3D printing, the outer surface is textured rather than smooth. Internally, a 36T ratchet system provides the drive, with titanium parts to keep the weight down. Thirty-six teeth on the ratchet seems a bit miserly, though at this price, when rival wheelsets offer 54 teeth or more for quicker engagement, and if you want CeramicSpeed bearings, then you’ll have to dig a little deeper in your wallet to the tune of another £500.

The wheels come with padded bags and a pouch containing cleaning products, a spoke/nipple key, and a 5.5mm wrench. All standard freehub options are available, and you can choose black or white decals.

For the same price and just a 30g penalty, the Artech 2.A (for All-road) wheels offer 3mm more inner rim width, designed for 30mm+ tyres.

Performance

A headline figure of 965g is obviously impressive on paper, but the reality of lifting the wheels out of the box was still incredible. I’m not a particularly heavy guy at 73kg, but it was hard to believe that these wheels would support me and my bike. They felt unbelievably light while still exuding quality, which eased most of my irrational trepidation.

A dream trip to France to ride a bunch of big cols and watch the Tour de France race up Alpe d’Huez twice was the ideal testing ground for the wheels, and while I was never going to trouble any KOM leaderboards, I hoped that the lightweight Artech wheels would offset a lack of fitness and training. As a comparison, I also took a set of still-light Oquo RP50LTD CS wheels, which, at just over 1,300g, still gave away almost 400g to the Scopes.

With 28mm Pirelli Race RS tyres, TPU tubes and a 34T cassette fitted, the Aretchs dropped the weight of the Handsling A1R0evoS to a UCI-bothering, Alp-flattening 6.45kg! I was less taken with the aesthetic effect on my bike, though; skinny wheels on an aero-tubed carbon bike look a bit wrong and unbalanced, but hey, you can’t see the wheels when you’re riding it.

If I had to describe riding the Artechs in one word, it would be ‘lively’. Uphill, there is no substitute for carrying as little weight as possible, and with the Artechs, every pedal stroke, in or out of the saddle, caused a discernible acceleration; the steeper the road, the more noticeable the effect. Velocity changes were instant, even with my meagre power, and the rewarding feeling of each watt heading straight onto the tarmac was addictive, and even encouraged me to vacate my saddle and stand up just to enjoy the sensation further. The wheels didn’t make the Col de la Loze, the Galiber or Alpe d’Huez any shorter, but they certainly made them slightly less painful and more enjoyable.

The wheels were slightly less enjoyable when descending, as the liveliness continued. This isn’t Scope’s fault, but that of physics: a very light wheel provides less gyroscopic stability than a heavier one, and this was noticeable when riding downhill. Small inputs affected the bike more than they did with the deeper, heavier wheelset. The handling never became problematic, but the difference was tangible, and I preferred the feel of the heavier wheels when heading down; these aren’t wheels that carve or flow easily downhill. Of course, the 22mm rims don’t catch the wind, though, so there is a potential handling benefit there to offset the lack of mass.

While the wheelset’s stiffness helped on climbs, it was also a bit less compliant than I expected. With a shallow rim and long spokes, you’d expect lots of comfort, but the carbon rim/carbon spoke combo of the Artech 2s proved to be pretty stiff, especially combined with the 28mm tyres.

I think if I were buying these (or any of the Artech range), then I’d look at the All-road versions for the extra rim width and consequent tyre volume in order to better combat ‘modern’ road surfaces. This would allow for all the performance inherent in a structurally stiff wheel but add in some extra compliance for comfort on poor roads – Andy Turner tried the deeper, 1,200g Scope Artech 4.A wheels with the extra width and found them to offer plenty of comfort.

For such a light object, the rear wheel doesn’t half make a racket. The freehub is, without doubt, the loudest I’ve encountered, knocking Chris King, Hope, DT Swiss and Scribe into a cocked hat. While riding, the choice was clear: freewheel or chat; you couldn't do both. Ineos Grenadiers group training rides must be deafening!

As well as riding them in the high Alps, I also managed to fit in a quick test on the more prosaic hills of the Peak District on my usual Tuesday night group ride. Here, the wheels continued to impress with their responsiveness and ease of acceleration on steeper gradients, but the poor UK road surfaces emphasised their relative lack of compliance, and there were a few comments about the volume of the freehub.

Value

Riding the Artech 2s in their natural home was amazing and underlined the tangible difference between light and really light wheels. When climbing, the instant response each pedal stroke elicited was amazing, and when descending, the extra friskiness was exhilarating but not necessarily relaxing.

While I doubt the small area of fish scales afforded by the shallow rims benefited me much, the innovative design and construction of the hubs help explain the £3,500/ $4,398 asking price. Add in the incredibly low weight and lack of rider weight limit, and the Artechs are undoubtedly an impressive set of wheels.

At this price, value is almost irrelevant, but for the record, Princeton CarbonWorks, Lightweight, and Enve all make more expensive wheels. I suspect that if you are considering spending the price of a decent bike on a set of fairly specialised wheels, then you are well aware of their value to you, but the Scope Artech 2s are clearly well made, super light and very strong with some interesting tech.

Necessary? No, but lovely nevertheless.

Tech spec

• Price: £3,500/ $4,398
• Weight: 981g (actual, w/ rim tape)
• Hubset: Artech 3D printed
• Freehub options: Shimano HG11/12, SRAM XDR, Campagnolo
• Rim depth: 22mm front/rear
• Rim width: 23mm internal
• Spoke count: 18/24 front/rear
• Rim: Hooked

Gravel shoes need to combine the on-bike performance of a road shoe with the off-bike abilities of a walking shoe. They need to be stiff yet comfortable, light yet durable, and still provide decent traction for any sections of hike-a-bike (and tricky pub beer gardens).

Udog, or Underdog for long, is an Italian brand founded in 2021 that produces a small range of gravel and road cycling shoes. The Forza is its gravel option (with the Distanza being the lace-up version), and it is aimed at the mid-ground between casual and racing use.

Design details

Udog’s USP is its Tension Wrap System, a design which uses straps that run underneath the foot and are then part of the lacing system, theoretically providing a more encompassing and secure hold on the foot while also spreading the load.

On the Forza, the twist-dial lace system runs through two attachment points on the forefoot, then through the TWS straps and a third point before being tightened by the dial. Operation is simple - one way to tighten, the other to loosen - and the dial is see-through, so you can actually see the small cogs inside.

The upper is made from a knit-style fabric with a huge pull loop on the rear and an equally large toe bumper on the front (that is really an extension of the sole). The padded tongue is attached to the upper on one side to prevent it from moving. Inside the shoe, the heel is lined with a silicone grip material for better heel retention and the basic insole is decorated with an image of a rider.

As a gravel shoe, the nylon carbon composite sole unit is compatible with two-bolt SPD cleats and has a grippy rubber outsole that wraps up over the toe section. This gives the shoe a unique, slightly bulbous look, which might prove a bit Marmite. The outsole itself, though, isn’t particularly aggressive, and the tread is not very deep, so mud-pluggers need not apply. There aren’t any bolt holes for toe studs either, further marking the Forza out as a more general option as opposed to a shoe for XC/CX/gravel racers.

It is a unisex design available in whole sizes from EU38 to 48, in black, white or grey (as tested), and my pair of size 44s weighed 754g.

Performance

Despite their slightly ungainly looks, the Forza was instantly comfortable - the combination of soft upper and the TWS made my feet feel enveloped and secure; a bit like wearing a very stiff pair of worn-in slippers. The forefoot was not as wide as the bulbous design suggested, and in fact was probably on the slightly narrow side, which suited me just fine, holding my foot perfectly all round, with a neat feeling belied by the clumpy looks. The toe box does have some depth, but with the wraparound sole and extended protection layer, there is not much scope for give here.

The heel, too, was very secure-feeling and comfortable; the internal silicone dots kept the shoes feeling snug without causing friction or hotspots, whether on or off the bike.

Even up here in deepest Yorkshire, the summer test period was dry and dusty, and I was able to put lots of miles in wearing the shoes. In fact, the dustiness highlighted how well-ventilated the mesh fabric is; the forefoot of my once-white socks was peppered with a matching mesh pattern of dirt after each dry ride. Ideal for warm summer rides, but I certainly wouldn’t be reaching for the Forzas in sub-zero temperatures!

Stiffness and power transfer were spot on too, ideal for enthusiastic-but-not-racing type rides, never feeling wasteful but not as unforgiving as something like Sidi’s rock-solid Physis. The TWS system was not intrusive but worked well to provide some support around the midfoot whilst allowing other areas of the upper to move, flex, and stretch with the foot rather than holding it rigidly in place throughout.

Ultimately, I’d always prefer two dials instead of one for greater control and customisation, but in this instance, one dial did the job okay and is about par for the course at the price point.

All was not quite perfect, though, as there were a couple of perplexing niggles with the Forzas. Firstly, I had to tighten them up a few times per ride, which was odd, though whenever I made a concerted effort to monitor them and the dial positions, it didn’t happen. And secondly, the Shimano SH51 cleats I used wore out very quickly on the Udogs – either I got my cleat position entirely wrong, Shimano is now using Cheddar rather than steel, or the rubber grips were so close to the cleats that I was entering the pedals at an odd angle every time. As yet, I don’t have the answer.

The final oddity is that the heel on the outsole is both a bit narrow and very short, which compromises stability when walking on rough ground. In fact, the rearmost section of the heel cup sits 3cm further back than the rearmost section of the rubber sole, so it is very easy to catch the shoe rather than the sole. Perhaps some of the excessive rubber over the toe box would have been better used further back on the shoe.

Value

Despite these criticisms, the Forzas were great to use, with a good balance of comfort and performance, and I have had no qualms about reaching for them for every gravel ride recently. The aesthetics might be a bit divisive, but you should be looking at the trail rather than your feet anyway!

With a price tag of £175/ $230, Udog are operating in a very competitive arena, but despite the couple of perplexing ‘issues’ mentioned above (which may not be the shoe’s fault), I think they are well worth a try. They feel neater in use than they look, and have proved themselves very comfortable no matter how long the ride. Breathability was excellent, and thus far they seem pretty durable.

Similar in price and design to the Specialized Recon 2 and the Quoc Gran Tourer, but with a knit upper, the Udogs are in the right price range.

As ever with footwear, fit is more important than anything else. I had wrongly assumed that the Forzas would be quite wide from their external looks, but in fact the opposite is true, so if your feet err towards the narrower, low-volume end of the spectrum and you want some comfortable, all-day shoes that still provide good performance, then they might be just the ticket.

Tech spec

• Price: £ 175/ $230
• Weight: 754g (actual, size EU44)
• Outsole: Carbon-nylon composite
• Retention: Single dial (Twist Tech)
• Colours: 3 (Grey, Black, White)
• Sizes: EU38-48

While sightings first surfaced at the Traka gravel race in May, we got our first real look at a Factor One-inspired gravel bike at Unbound later in the same month, ridden by former WorldTour pro Romain Bardet and some of his teammates. I wouldn’t say I was shocked so much as I was surprised, as I was told just a few weeks earlier that the company was capping its gravel bike offering at three distinct models – at the time that comprised the Ostro Gravel, Aluto and recently released Sarana.

Unbeknownst to me, however, Factor was already cooking up a radical new aero gravel machine designed to replace the Ostro Gravel. Dubbed the Elara, it came to fruition as an idea floated by the brand's athletes – Magnus Bak Klaris and Romain Bardet, both of whom were instrumental in bringing it to life. Magnus, a self-confessed cycling tech obsessive and PhD candidate, asked the design team for an aero gravel bike solution that could accommodate 57mm-wide tyres, as he felt this was the future of gravel racing and could potentially make him faster.

Factor's three-model gravel lineup aims to address the various offshoots of the burgeoning gravel cycling discipline: the Aluto represents the middle ground (Race Balance), the Sarana takes care of the adventure side (Race Endurance), while the Elara is an all-out speed merchant (Race Speed).

Design details

The Elara is available in two colours: virescent blue (pictured here) or matte carbon. I'm a huge fan of raw carbon finishes and would have loved to see the bike in that configuration, but the metallic, desaturated turquoise hue is rather pretty. I like the colour-coded seatpost, too – it's a lovely detail, so is the F.K.T. logo (Fastest Known Time) on the top tube.

In terms of frame options, the Factor Elara is available in six sizes from 49 to 61cm.

As expected, the frame and fork are constructed using a meld of materials – TeXtreme, Toray, Nippon Graphite and Pan-Based fibres, but where 3K woven fibers typically comprise the downtube, Factor has incorporated reinforced TeXtreme for extra strength.

The front triangle draws many parallels with the Factor One and Ostro VAM – specifically the fork integration, hourglass-shaped head tube, and leading edge around the downtube. Factor cites a 2.5w gain from relocating the leading edge forward on the fork compared to the original fork design.

Ah yes, original fork design, I hear you mumble?

Yep, the Factor Elara initially started out with a traditional-looking fork, but after seeing the online memes showing the Factor One aero bike with a 2.2-inch mountain bike tyre shoehorned up front, the design team got thinking and tested the Elara with a wider, Factor One-style fork in the wind tunnel in December last year.

What started as a laugh turned out to be an effective solution that improved both aerodynamics and handling.

This was quantified using CFD modelling with a textured map and followed by 3D tyre testing before validation in the wind tunnel – the testing showed that airflow was contained within the fork with measurable drag reductions with 45–57mm race tyres, delivering aero efficiency on par with modern road frames.

While it uses a similar aero chin protrusion to the One, in this application, the fork is UCI-illegal because the fork conformity and down tube boxes intersect. Look closely, and you'll find no UCI-approved decal; then again, most of the races where the Elara will be used are non-UCI-sanctioned events, so it doesn't matter.

Those with a keen eye might even recall the Factor gravel bikes used by Romain Bardet and Magnus Bak Klaris at the Santa Vall gravel race in Spain earlier this year. While some cited the bikes as updated Ostro Gravel bikes, they were actually early Elara prototypes – just without the aero fork pictured here. Factor had aero forks ready to go, but they hadn't undergone the necessary safety checks and stress testing, so they decided to field-test the Elara with the regular fork instead.

The Elara’s geometry is inspired by Factor’s road bikes, and the riding position also reflects this – so it has a long reach with reduced trail number and a bottom bracket that is positioned lower to ensure stability across the board. To avoid stretching out the chainstays, the bottom bracket has been positioned lower (80mm) to help triangulate the rear end – this has also ensured stability and preserved agile handling characteristics. It also doesn’t veer too far from rear centre dimension relative to the rider’s centre of gravity, as the Ostro Gravel does.

On a medium-sized frame (54cm), Factor has paired a 72.5-degree head angle with a 74.5-degree seat tube angle, with the chainstays measuring 420mm. In fact, the head tube angle, trail number, and fork offset are basically the same as the Ostro Gravel.

The big news with the Factor Elara, however, is how it was manufactured: the entire frame is a one-piece monocoque, built to the exact tolerances needed to clear a 57mm chainline, 52T 1x chainring, and a two-by front derailleur. The monocoque construction also makes for a lighter frameset. This also means the chainstays are a single piece, not bonded, so the alignment is perfect. It has allowed Factor to use wafer-thin rather than solid carbon, so Shimano Di2 cables can still thread out the rear. As such, the rear triangle uses a split-plane design with a lowered drive-side stay and an offset seat-tube junction.

To ensure a polished product, Factor spent considerable time refining the details and industrial design of the rubber gaskets used throughout the bike. Another area was the seatpost clamp, now removable and easy to service while retaining all the benefits of the pusher clamp system seen on the Ostro Gravel 2.0. Other details include a default 160/160 front/rear rotor configuration, a threaded bottom bracket, UDH functionality, range-universal dust caps for handlebar cross-compatibility, and the same seatpost dimensions as the Ostro VAM.

Specifications

The Elara is the second Factor gravel bike I've recently sampled that came outfitted with SRAM Force AXS and a power meter. It's a superb groupset, delivering Red AXS performance at a much more palatable price point. In terms of the tactile experience, overall performance, and brake modulation, the differences are marginal.

This particular build features Force XPLR AXS, which combines a one-by 44T chainring with a 10-46T cassette and direct-mount rear mech. Shifting is crisp and predictable, and the gearing is well matched to the terrain I ride around the Surrey Hills. The Elara also benefits from a new 38cm Black Inc Aero Gravel Bar AB07 matched to a 120mm stem, complete with a 17-degree flared drop.

Of all the components, the big talking point is the Black Inc 64 Gravel wheels. Built exclusively for the Factor Elara, they function as a complete system with the frameset. While you can outfit it with shallower Black Inc 46 wheels or pair it with another compatible brand, the bike was optimised around the 64mm deep rim and 2.0in-wide tyres. The deep rim profile is matched to a modern 30mm internal rim width (40mm external) and plays nicely with tyres up to 57mm (2.2in). The minimum tyre size compatible with the Black Inc 64 Gravel wheels is 47mm.

All this, however, means the wheels tip the scales at a rather hefty 1,620g (720/900g front/rear).

It also has in-frame storage for those who need it. Accessible through a door beneath the Black Inc bottle cage on the downtube, it houses a pouch for storing tools, a tube, and perhaps some emergency gels.

Performance

The Factor Elara was designed for speed – it’s a fast bike, and that goes for whether you ride it on gravel or tarmac. As such, the bike works as a complete system - frame set and wheels combined - and you can feel this out on the trail. For a bike as radical-looking as the Elara, it’s incredibly easy to ride, and despite the 8.75kg weight, it minces rolling hills and is able to get up the steeper stuff fairly adequately, too.

While you can feel the added rolling resistance of the 2.0in Continental Race King tyres, the benefits these rubber options afford are truly incredible, especially when the terrain is washboard-like or heavily corrugated.

I've raced gravel bikes in week-long stage races with much firmer ride qualities than the Elara, and I think the firmness-to-comfort balance here is good. The vibration-induced speed loss I've often experienced just didn't feel present as the Black Inc 64 Gravel wheels and tyres soaked up vibrations and ever-changing chunky terrain effectively. The result is speed unlike anything else I’ve tested – in fact, you’ll find yourself held back more by your lack of confidence rather than the Elara. Overcome this and ride the Elara harder than you usually ride a gravel bike, and the rewards are massive.

I found myself barreling into corners at much higher speeds than usual, relying on the blocky shoulder knobs of the Race Kings to grip into the hardpack lurking under the powdery surface layers. At first you can hear the tyre breaking traction as you lean in, pushing the front end into the trail beneath, followed by a skidding sensation from the unweighted rear – but then the tyres bite, and grip comes in spades. Get into a rhythm and start stitching together a state of flow, and it becomes a vivid picture of detail and connection, often missing from the gravel bike recipe. It’s a little trickier in singletrack – especially when climbing tightly stitched-together sections and toe overlap comes into play.

The Elara only truly comes alive when the road ahead opens up. Tuck in and assume the lowest position you can, and watch the speed increase on your cycling computer. It’s absolutely mental; not even the terrain can hold it back or scrub off progress.

The ride quality isn't too bad, all things considered. Of course, the wheels and tyres are a large reason for its ability to soak up bumps and hits from below, and this helps with keeping things swift. The front end and Black Inc Aero Gravel Bar AB07 arrangement is pretty stiff (as is the BB area) and expected at this level, and while I suffered no real hand and arm pain, I’m confident that if you pair it with the correct tyre pressure (for your weight), you’ll be able to find a balance to best suit your needs. This is a racing bike after all!

The riding position is fairly aggressive and not too far removed from other racing gravel bikes (and some road bikes for that matter); Factor made a point of retaining the Ostro Gravel's frame angles and for good reason – there was nothing to fix. As a racing gravel bike, the Elara needs to be ridden hard, and that means setting it up to match its intentions. I kept things aggressive with a forward-bias setup, which let me stretch out into an aero position.

The gearing is good, too. While it can accommodate two-by drivetrains and subsequently unlock another level of speed, the stock 44T, 10-46T gearing spread was ample for my testing routes.

The bars are pretty ergonomic for the application, with a slight flare. The one-piece bar-stem configuration gives you confidence to hit ruts at speed without worrying about the bar rotating in the stem, as traditional bar/stem setups often can. A setup like this matters even more on descents, where you need the confidence and trust to navigate technical terrain at high speeds.

I tested the Elara on both gravel and tarmac, with both the stock Black Inc 64 Gravel wheels with 2.0in Conti Race Kings as well as Fulcrum Sharq GR wheels wrapped in Vittoria Corsa Pro Control 42c road tyres. This test showed that the Elara is absolutely rapid on tarmac with slick rubber fitted, and can easily keep up on fast group rides – even at average speeds of 36km/h and above.

On the road with the stock Race Kings, the Elara never really feels held back either; if anything, it’s more the humming of the 50mm tyres that suggests you might be going slower. That said, you will need to work the pedals harder to overcome the rolling resistance of the chunkier tyres.

Tyre clearance is ample, especially on the stock 2.0in Race King configuration. While it’s been fairly dry in the south of England, where I've done most of my testing, there was at least one wet, muddy day that put the grip and clearance to the test. The Race Kings are great: their mud clearing is impressive, as is their grip in the wet, but over some prolonged, seriously sticky sections, I could feel and hear mud coming into contact with the underside of the fork crown. Whether this might be more of an issue in areas with clay soil, I don't know, but in those conditions, no bike will be immune.

Overall, I had no issues with the stock 2.0in tyres, as well as no desire nor reason to shoehorn anything wider in either – and I put this bike through its paces on properly chunky, muddy technical terrain.

As a racing package, the Factor Elara makes complete sense for events such as Unbound and stage races like Gravel Burn. In fact, if I were entered for this year’s edition of Gravel Burn, the Elara would be my weapon of choice given the speed it’s able to maintain over rough terrain – any weight penalty is more than made up for in comfort, speed and confidence. The Black Inc 64 Gravel wheels and 2.0-inch tyres essentially act as suspension and let you bulldoze and bully your way through terrain that would previously thwart progress and bring about unimaginable levels of vibration-induced wrist, head, neck, and body pain.

Value

As it stands, the Factor Elara occupies a unique position, with few rivals. Sure, the 3T Racemax² Force gravel bike comes to mind, but it offers neither the same level of tyre clearance nor the aggressive geometry of the Elara, despite coming in at a more affordable price point in the UK and EU (it's pricier in the US).

In fact, the closest rival is the Ridley Kanzo Fast 2.0, which clears tyres as wide as 58mm, and hits a cheaper price point in the same Force AXS build. Then again, the Kanzo 2.0 is only available in four frame sizes and also lacks the super-aero Black Inc 64 Gravel wheels, which are a key differentiator and a key component that set the Factor Elara apart – it's a case of sliding scales.

The Factor Elara - as expected - is a pricey beast, but there are options available. The bike pictured here will set you back £9,499/ $9,699/ €11,599 as a full build. Opt for SRAM Red AXS, and this figure will climb to £10,999/ $11,399/ €13,599.

You can also purchase the frameset and build it up accordingly if you've already got some components lying about; this will cost you £5,899/ $5,999/ €7,199. Factor says you can build and spec it with any gravel wheelset. That said, having tested it both as a full system and with aftermarket wheels, the Black Inc 64s are the way to go if you're after the full experience.

Purchasing the Black Inc 64 Gravel wheels separately will add £2,199/ $2,199/ €2,599 to your bill, but there's also a shallower £1,699/ $1,699/ €1,999 Black Inc 46 wheelset option if that's too dear.

Scoring breakdown

Tech spec

• Price: £9,499/ $9,699/ €11,599
• Brand: Factor
• Frame: TeXtreme, Toray, Nippon Graphite with Pan-Based Fibre
• Fork: Full carbon
• Weight: 8.75kg (actual, 54cm)
• Sizes: 47, 52, 54, 56, 58, 61cm
• Levers: SRAM Force AXS
• Brakes: SRAM Force AXS, 160/160mm front/rear
• Rear derailleur: SRAM Force AXS
• Front derailleur: SRAM Force AXS
• Crankset: SRAM Force AXS with Power Meter, 44T
• Bottom bracket: T47A, threaded
• Cassette: SRAM Force XPLR AXS 10-46T
• Chain: SRAM Force
• Wheels: Black Inc 64 Gravel
• Tyres: Continental Race King 2.0
• Bar/stem: Black Inc Aero Gravel Bar AB07
• Seatpost: Factor aero-profile carbon
• Saddle: Selle Italia SLR Elite

The Garmin Forerunner 970 is described on the brand’s website as a premium running watch. In big letters. Accompanied by prominent images of athletes running. So, why am I reviewing it for Cycling Weekly? Well, despite its name and Garmin’s product positioning, it’s actually a highly capable multisport watch, so I was curious to discover whether we can judge it one of best smartwatches for cyclists.

Launched in May 2025, it’s certainly not just a running watch that happens to support a few other sports as a token gesture. Without exception, its sports profiles reach far and deep; including every activity you can think of from sail racing to snowmobiling. In fact, as I’ll come on to, its cycling profile has pretty much the same functionality as one of Garmin’s high-end Edge head units, such as the 850.

However, what makes 970 especially compelling is how it tracks your performance, recovery and wellness when you step away from the bike to dive into the pool, sprint on your favourite running trail or collapse into bed. It promises to monitor, support and coach you holistically 24/7, which is appealing for those who throw themselves into multiple sports, triathletes especially. There is a catch, though – to get the most from this watch, you have to commit to wearing it all the time. That makes daily comfort and styling less of a preference and more of a non-negotiable.

As well as cycling, I swim on a daily basis and hill walk two or three times a week, so despite not being a runner, I’m a good candidate for the Forerunner 970. Up until recently, its predecessor, the Forerunner 955 Solar, remained on my wrist, day and night, for more than two years.

Design details

The Forerunner 970 packs such comprehensive functionality that calling it feature-rich is like calling Jeff Bezos comfortably off. There’s an absolute wealth of utility here. The full list of activity profiles – sports modes – is so comprehensive it verges on the ridiculous. In a good way, of course. The primary categories are Running, Cycling, Swimming, Multisport, Gym, Outdoor, Winter Sports, Water Sports, Team Sports, Racket Sports, Motorsports and Other.

Within each category sit a plethora of sub-categories. Under Cycling, for example, you’ll find Bike, Bike Commute, Bike Indoor, Bike Tour, BMX, Cyclocross, eBike, eMTB, Gravel Bike, MTB and Road Bike. Each has associated data fields, some specific – grit and flow for mountain biking – and some shared. Naturally, metrics such as Time, Distance, Elevation, and Heart Rate are core to many activities. Garmin occasionally adds profiles as part of its regular firmware rollouts, so it’s hard to be definitive about the absolute number that exists. However, when I last counted, there were 99.

Data can be analysed on the watch or using Garmin Connect – the brand’s combined analytics engine and user dashboard – on mobile or desktop devices. The Forerunner 970 is great at reporting a week’s worth of data, but with Connect, or the paid-for Connect+, it’s possible to reach back years. If benchmarking performance over time is important to you, Connect enables much deeper analysis.

The watch case is made from fibre-reinforced polymer, with a titanium bezel, sapphire crystal lens and a silicone strap. Generally, the look is very understated, but to appeal to the more flamboyant cyclist, Garmin produces three colour variations: Carbon (charcoal black), with a carbon grey DLC titanium bezel and black/Whitestone (off-white) strap; Whitestone, with a natural titanium bezel and Whitestone/yellow strap and French Grey with a gold titanium bezel and a French Grey/indigo strap. The secondary strap colours are translucent and sit beneath the band, next to the skin, so providing the merest hint of colour.

If you want to pimp your 970 further, Garmin offers a huge number of coloured strap options, either at point of sale or as an aftermarket upgrade. Last time I checked, it listed 69 on its site, mostly silicone but with some cool nylon webbing options available, too.

Multiple upgrades mark the 970 as a cut above its immediate predecessor, the Forerunner 965 (circa 2023) and my Forerunner 955 Solar (circa 2022). Firstly, the touchscreen is now made of sapphire crystal rather than Corning Gorilla Glass. I found the Gorilla Glass on my 955 to be extremely resilient, but sapphire crystal is virtually scratchproof, even if it is slightly more reflective in harsh sunlight. Garmin, of course, dropped solar from the Forerunner range with the introduction of the 965.

A more significant upgrade is the display technology. Garmin received a lot of flak for embracing a supremely colourful Amoled display for the 965, because many found it much harder to view in bright conditions than the 955’s transflective memory-in-pixel (MIP) display. The 965 may have been richer in colour and more vivid, but ultimately less legible in testing conditions. Garmin has countered such complaints by maintaining the 965’s 454 x 454-pixel resolution but significantly increasing the 970’s display brightness.

Another headline upgrade is the inclusion of Garmin’s Elevate Gen 5 optical heart rate sensor array with integrated metal sensors, which fully supports FDA-cleared/medically certified ECG recordings directly on the watch, as well as skin temperature readings. Flip the watch over, and you’ll find an array of six LED’s, up from four. This development promises to deliver more dependable heart rate readings. It has always been a challenge for wrist-based sensors to match the performance of highly accurate yet unwieldy chest straps.

It’s worth noting that although the Elevate Gen 5 optical heart rate sensor can detect and report episodes of Fibrillation (AFib), this only occurs during a manual trace. Unlike some of its competitors, it cannot detect or warn of rhythm irregularities on the fly.

The Forerunner 970 now features a built-in speaker and microphone, bringing voice calls, voice commands, and access to a voice-activated smartphone assistant to your wrist. It doesn’t work as a standalone cellular device in the way that cellular Apple iWatch models do, but you no longer have to fish your phone from your jersey back pocket to answer a call. The speaker also enhances spoken navigation prompts.

Perhaps not quite as technically impressive, yet nonetheless a bright idea from Garmin, is the tiny LED flashlight that’s integrated between the lugs at the top of the case. It’s positioned here so that it shines forward when you raise the watch in front of your body. The light can be programmed to emit white light during daylight hours and red light at night to preserve natural night vision. Many Garmin watches feature a ‘flashlight’, but they tend to rely on illuminating the face bright white at maximum power. This is a far more elegant and powerful solution.

Robust environmental sealing gives the 970 a 5 ATM rating, making it watertight to 50 metres. This is so good it’s almost overkill for rainy rides, swimming, pool diving, snorkelling and so on – after all, most recreational scuba divers won’t go much deeper than 30 metres.

Annoyingly, Garmin uses a proprietary charging lead to juice up the 970, via a small port on the rear of the case. However, at least it is USB-C at the power source end. Connection to the watch is solid, and charging is fast, about two hours from flat as a pancake to 100% peppy. More on this later. Quoted battery life is also decent, especially considering the 970’s bright display. Garmin reckons it will last for 15 days in smartwatch mode, falling to 12 hours with pretty much every feature active, including multiband GPS and music playback. This compares well with the dimmer 965, which boasted 23 days and 8.5 hours respectively.

Finally, just like a Garmin Edge, and most other cycling computers, the Forerunner 970's feature set can be augmented with sensors over ANT+ or BLE, such as power meters, cadence sensors, bike radar and chest strap heart rate monitors (useful for swimming). It can also be customised and enhanced with any number of widgets from the Garmin Connect IQ store. These add-ons include everything from alternative watch faces to wind data.

Performance

First, let’s run through some everyday fundamentals. The Forerunner 970 is so laden with customisable features, you’d be forgiven for thinking it would be challenging to navigate its vast menu system. It’s not. The 47mm touchscreen, which is super responsive, together with five physical buttons, makes short work of everything from recording an activity to checking the weather forecast. The UI is so slick, I can start logging a road bike ride with just a couple of clicks and taps.

Similarly, Garmin’s clever ‘Glances’ feature – a customisable, scrollable dashboard of metrics – enables me to check my training status, my HRV, my endurance score and so on with just a flick of my index finger. The interface is magnificently accessible and polished.

Battery life may be slightly less impressive than its predecessor, the 965, but rather than bore you with precise figures that may have little bearing on your own experience, I can tell you that I rarely think about charging it. Usually, my 970 gets a quick charge while I’m taking my morning shower, and that’s it. If I miss a day, it’s no drama; the 970 just ticks on and on. Unlike the notorious Apple iWatch of a few years back, which could barely make it through to tea time, the 970 is an absolute powerhouse day in, day out.

Battery life is highly individual, depending on the sports profiles you activate and the sensors you have attached. If, like me, your daily activities rarely top three hours and you only rely on a couple of sensors, there will always be plenty in reserve. Ultra competitors will have to be a little more cautious, especially those who like to listen to music while they race.

One way to conserve power is to ensure the display is set to Gesture mode rather than Always On Display. In Gesture mode, aka Raise to Wake, the screen stays completely dark until you perform a wrist-turn gesture toward your face, at which point the display instantly wakes up to full brightness. In my experience, this works well most of the time, but it can be a bit sluggish. Occasionally, despite giving it a long, contemptuous look, it does fail to wake, which can be frustrating.

Another way to save power is to reduce GPS sampling by selecting a conservative setting such as UltraTrac. This may be helpful for ultra runners, because they’ll be moving relatively slowly. In my experience, faster pursuits such as cycling demand greater accuracy, so my advice is to leave it in default AutoSelect mode and forget about it. GPS accuracy in this mode is exemplary, even under tree cover, in the mountains or surrounded by tall buildings. Acquisition is fast, and it tracks just as well as my Edge 1050 head unit.

Talking of accuracy, the Elevate Gen 5 optical heart rate sensor is still a bit hit and miss, especially if the strap isn’t tightly secured on the wrist. It needs to be snug even during sleep, which won’t suit everyone. Cycling, in common with other sports that involve flexing the wrists, presents several challenges for watches such as the Forerunner 970. As hands grip, muscles contract, restricting local blood vessels, which makes it harder for the optical sensor to detect blood volume pulses. Additionally, when the wrist twists, the watch case can lift very slightly from the skin, flooding the sensor with ambient light, making it impossible to record accurate readings.

During my riding, false readings were particularly noticeable when sprinting. At the start of an effort there was often significant lag, when compared to using Garmin’s HRM 600 chest strap. This would settle down once I maintained a more regular pace, but for the first few seconds the readings were often all over the place. So, if you require absolute precision, I recommend pairing the 970 with a compatible ANT+ or BLE chest strap.

The addition of ECG generation on the 970 is a welcome update for Atrial Fibrillation sufferers like me. In truth, it’s arguably even more valuable for those yet to be formally diagnosed, as the intermittent nature of AFib makes capturing a reading notoriously elusive. By the time you’ve reached medical help, the rhythm will often have returned to normal. While capturing, saving, and exporting a reading is straightforward, it’s a pity the watch can’t continuously monitor for irregular rhythms without initiating a manual test. Recording a trace is simply a matter of launching a dedicated ECG app on the watch, which will instruct you to sit still and rest your thumb and forefinger on opposite sides of the metal bezel. Once complete, the ECG is saved to Garmin Connect, from where it can be shared with your cardiologist.

All the derogatory comments you’ll find online about Garmin ditching memory-in-pixel (MIP) displays for AMOLED are no longer justified. I found the Forerunner 970’s vivid screen effortlessly legible, whether under bleak, late-winter Cotswold skies or the blazing summer sun on a Porquerolles gravel track. As noted, battery life is a non-issue.

It still seems incredible to me that the little Forerunner 970 very nearly matches a modern bike computer, such as a Garmin Edge 850, feature for feature. It is missing a few high-end tricks, such as smart fuelling alerts, gear ratio analysis for those with electronic shifting, advanced power guidance and very high frequency GPS recording, but frankly, these features are pretty niche.

The benefit of a watch such as this over a bike computer is that it can monitor your performance and recovery 24/7. Garmin does this with features such as Sleep Coach, Sleep Alignment, Nap Detection, Women’s Health Tracking (menstrual cycle and pregnancy monitoring), Body Battery Energy Monitoring, Training Status (exercise history, VO2 max and so on), HRV Status, Skin Temperature, Breathing Variations and Recovery Time.

In short, it’s a bit like having your own medical team continuously monitoring you before feeding back whether you should be pushing more or recovering more. Most of these programs use your HRV status to calculate just how much you should and shouldn’t be doing, but I’m being over-simplistic – the results and recommendations are more detailed and more nuanced than that.

Your sleep patterns and exercise history inform Garmin’s suite of Daily Suggested Workouts, together with any of the brand’s coaching plans that you’ve signed up to. Overdo it, or if your HRV shows signs of you falling ill, and efforts will be scaled back until you’re fully recovered. Fail to turn up, and the 970 will gently cajole you into doing a bit more. Some people may hate this level of nagging, but others, like me, will doubtless find it motivating. Certainly, watching your FTP and VO2 max scores improve over time is encouraging.

Key reports to keep your training on goal include Acute Load (which compares your recent training load to the optional range), Endurance Score (your ability to sustain prolonged efforts), and Training Effect (how efforts influence endurance, speed and power).

Some of these programs and metrics will be familiar to Edge users, the difference being that with a head unit they’re only current and valid when on the bike. With the 970 on your wrist monitoring 24/7, the data environment is far richer.

There are, of course, drawbacks to using the Forerunner 970 as a bike computer. The glaringly obvious issue is that, well, the 970 is just not obvious enough. Whether you’re riding flat bars or curly bars, the watch face will always be pointing anywhere but straight at you, making it impossible to steal a glance. You’re welcome to lift your hand away from bars to take a proper look, but this quickly becomes tiresome when you’re trying to monitor metrics such as heart rate or power.

Secondly, it goes without saying that the screen real estate, all 47mm x 47mm of it, cannot compare with even the smallest Garmin bike computer. This is especially an issue when trying to navigate. That said, I have on occasion found the 970’s focussed, uncluttered nav screen easier to navigate complex urban routes than a larger Edge with its more distracting level of detail.

Where it excels, beyond its wellness, recovery and performance monitoring features, is as a multisport watch. It’s a fact that active people tend to enjoy a range of activities, a phenomenon sociologists call an ‘active lifestyle cluster’. Often, participants give little thought to this – they just like being active, so they end up enjoying a variety of stuff. The more competitive-minded, however, will be actively seeking other activities that support and enhance their primary sport. A good example of this is the relatively recent trend of competitive cyclists building gym and pool sessions into their training routines. The logical extension of this multisport overlap is, of course, triathlon, where cross-training evolves into a sport of its own.

If, like me, you enjoy a range of activities and feel you’ll benefit from analysing the data generated, a bike computer alone isn’t going to cut it. For example, I often cycle to the pool, take a swim, and cycle back. By creating a custom Multisport mode, I can program the 970 to report on this as a combined effort, as opposed to three separate sessions. Alternatively, if you prefer, it’s also possible to manually change sports mid-session.

Unfortunately, if you plan to use a Garmin bike computer for a cycling leg before switching to the 970 for a run, Garmin hasn’t yet come up with a seamless way to hand over from one device to another. However, the workaround is to use ‘Extended Display Mode’ on the Edge, which essentially turns its screen into a dumb monitor for the 970. Incidentally, when you are recording a ride with an Edge but don’t want the hassle of wearing a chest strap, the 970 can broadcast your heart rate to it.

The 970 makes a compelling, compact travel companion too, for those trips when you may occasionally swing a leg over a saddle, but not often enough to warrant taking a full-blown bike computer. There’s the convenience of not having to charge an additional device and not having to worry about whether your hire bike or bikes will have compatible mounts. In fact, if you’re trying to rationalise the sheer amount of tech that we now bolt to our bikes, purchasing a ‘do-it-all’ 970 may help you streamline your rig, counterintuitive as that sounds.

For risk-averse riders, the Forerunner 970 is also well-suited to gnarly gravel or MTB rides, where a sticky-out head unit is perceived as a readily damaged, expensive liability. The reality is that crashes of this severity are pretty rare, and head units are pretty tough. So, make up your own mind on this one.

One small feature has had an astonishing impact on my everyday life. I’ve found the flashlight remarkably useful, from searching the dark depths of bikepacking bags in the wilds to illuminating dim, hard-to-reach DIY jobs at home. Beamed directly from my wrist, it frees up both hands - a massive advantage over the torch on my iPhone.

Value

At £629/ $699, the 970 sits at the top of Garmin’s Forerunner line, with a price tag to match. Yet, it’s actually a bit of a bargain when compared with the brand’s range-topping Fenix 8 adventure watch, which carries a 20 percent price premium. In terms of feature set and display quality, they’re almost indistinguishable, with the Fenix edging ahead only because it offers a scuba diving profile and a 100-metre depth rating. The real difference is in the Fenix’s construction, which is chunkier and heavier.

In my opinion, the svelte 970 fits more comfortably beneath tight, Lycra sleeves and, who knows (or cares), it’s probably more aero too. So, if you’ve been gassing for a Fenix 8 but aren’t a diver, save your money and consider the 970 instead.

Or you could save yourself some cash by stepping down a rung and buying a Forerunner 570 (£439/ $499). Many of the core features are the same but you’d have to forego onboard mapping – the 570 is limited to basic ‘breadcrumb’ line nav – and the built-in LED flashlight.

Stepping away from Garmin, the Apple Watch Ultra 2 is a premium all-rounder, but the battery life is poor in comparison, and its capability as a cycling computer is more limited than the 970. At £799/ $799 it is expensive.

Which is something that can’t be said of the Coros Pace 3, a multi-sport watch that offers 38 hours of GPS usage (15 days smartwatch usage) for just £219/$229. Unfortunately, it doesn’t have the same detailed level of mapping as the 970.

The Suunto Vertical Solar is comparable in price to the 970 at £525/ $599 and boasts a comprehensive feature set and class-leading battery power, part-fuelled by the sun.

The elephant in the room for competitor brands is Garmin’s ecosystem – a sticky web of interconnected metrics it has been shrewdly weaving for years. Once a user is caught in it, escaping is remarkably tough. Because Garmin devices integrate so seamlessly via Garmin Connect, once you’ve invested in your first device, brand loyalty becomes the path of least resistance. For example, if you ride with a Garmin Edge and swim or run with a Forerunner, Connect automatically merges the data into a single, unified score for Recovery Time, Acute Load, and HRV Status. To achieve anything close to that, rival brands rely on third-party ‘bridges’ such as Strava or Apple Health, but the integration is rarely as slick and reporting rarely as insightful.

Somewhat ironically, if you rarely participate in sports other than cycling but are considering the Forerunner 970 for its sleep and wellness tracking, Garmin has just launched the 970’s most compelling alternative. The Garmin Cirqa smart band (£179/ $199) is a headless tracker that records a similar suite of wellness and sleep metrics as the 970, together with a more limited set of fitness and activity metrics. Just like the 970, it seamlessly harmonises this data across all your Garmin devices via Garmin Connect.

In fact, the Cirqa supports a surprising number of sports activities, including running, swimming, and horseback riding; the catch is that it requires you to view progress and reporting on your smartphone. But, this may be enough. The Cirqa and an Edge head unit will prove a powerful combination for many cyclists, especially those who choose to wear a fancy dress watch or sports watch – Tag Heuer, Breitling, Omega, Rolex – over a plastic smartwatch.

Two final considerations. Wearing a watch 24/7 will potentially expose it to a lot of wear and tear. After less than three years (and directly post a firmware upgrade) my Forerunner 955 stopped recording HRV data, which essentially rendered it useless. It was out of warranty, but as a goodwill gesture Garmin offered me a reconditioned replacement for £150. Nevertheless, the original outlay combined with the replacement cost was a steep price to pay per year of use.

Secondly, accurate sleep tracking via wrist-based tech is notoriously difficult to achieve, so it’s wise to take any data with a few grains of salt. In many ways, this undermines the whole purpose of smartwatches like the Forerunner 970. Are they simply trying to be too smart for their own good? As a reassurance, the times I have had my VO2 max tested (not a sleep metric, I appreciate) in a sports lab, the results have been uncannily similar to Garmin’s numbers. So, I’m not saying these devices are wholly unreliable, but do bear in mind that they can be fallible.

Tech spec

• Price: £629/ $699
• Weight: 56g (without band)
• Display type: 1.4-inch AMOLED
• Water rating: 5 ATM (50 metres)
• Battery life: Up to 21 hours (All Systems + Multi-Band)
• Charger type: Proprietary USB-C cable

The Revolt is Giant’s long-standing gravel bike. First introduced in 2013, the design has been honed, improved, and upgraded many times, and the range now runs all the way from the £1,200/ $1,400 aluminium option up to the £5,000 carbon Revolt X Advanced Pro, or the $7,000 Advanced Pro 0 in the US.

In those 13 years, gravel bikes have morphed from something more akin to a cyclo-cross bike into a tool capable of tackling some very serious terrain and equally demanding distances. There are branches of the gravel family tree shooting off into adventure riding, group racing and even mountain bike-type territory, but the Revolt remains something of an all-rounder, especially this mid-priced Advanced 2 model.

I spent some time on the 2025 version of this bike, so was interested to see what changes, if any, had been made for 2026.

Technical details

Most obviously, the smart gloss black paint job remains, but the logo has been switched from iridescent purple to a tyre-matching tan colour. And at first glance, that is about it. In fact, at a second or third glance, there is not much that has been changed between the model years, but that is no bad thing, as I was impressed with the last year's Revolt.

The carbon frame is classic Giant, with a very compact design and masses of standover height, but there is a bit of cleverness going on around the seatpost. The supplied Giant D-Fuse carbon post is D-shaped for compliance, but fits into a round seat tube using a shim. This is a little bit of faff, but does give the option to run a 30.9mm dropper post if so desired, although I never quite got the rubber seal at the top of the seat tube to seat neatly in place.

Apparently the frame has been on a diet and dropped 160g through a change in carbon layup, but both the 2025 and 2026 models that I tested weighed in at 9.6kg for a M/L, probably because of a welcome increase in tyre width from 40mm to 45mm on the newer model.

Another carryover feature is the flip-chip on the rear dropout, which alters the chainstay length and hence the wheelbase by 10mm. The down tube storage, now a gravel mainstay, also remains.

Giant has used a neat compromise when it comes to the ever-fashionable internal cabling – the cables run through the frame as usual, but, crucially, don't run through the stem or handlebars. Instead, they route along the underside of the bars and stem before disappearing into a port on the front side of the steerer. This keeps the cables out of harm's way and prevents them from fouling handlebar bags, but it also means that bar and stem switches and alterations can be made far more easily.

Specifications

Complementing the carbon frame is Shimano’s 12-speed GRX groupset, using an 11-36T cassette paired with a 32/48T chainring configuration from FSA. The frame can take 53mm-wide tyres, too (in the long flip-chip position), so the inclusion of a front mech hasn’t affected clearance

As is the norm with Giant, most of the components, other than the groupset, are in-house. As mentioned, the stem and handlebars are Giant-branded, as are the seatpost and saddle. The P-X2 wheels are also a Giant product and are shod with, yep, Giant rubber in the form of 700x45C tubeless-ready Crosscut Grip gravel tyres. There is nothing inherently wrong with this approach, and it often enables better pricing and specifications than those of externally sourced components.

The Revolt range has three main families within it: the Revolt (aluminium), the Revolt Advanced (carbon composite) and the Revolt Advanced Pro (carbon composite with SL grade materials). Within each of these, there is a choice of specification.

Giant’s sizing runs from XS through S, M, ML, L to XL, and caters for riders from 155cm up to 200cm tall.

Performance

Between the 2025 and 2026 models, I’ve spent a lot of time on the Revolt over the last 12 months and racked up plenty of miles; I’ve ridden it on short, hard blasts and long, 100km+ days as well as overnighting with it, too.

I’ll start with my main negative point: the handlebars. While, controversially, I really liked the lack of flare, I think that they are too thin and harsh (especially when compared with the plush rear end), and the Stratus 3.0 bar tape does nothing to help this situation. Thicker bar tape is essential, but I’d more likely swap the bars completely for something more comfortable if the bike were mine. In part, this is a function of the trails I ride being a bit more MTB-adjacent than champagne gravel, but even on smooth terrain, some additional comfort won’t go amiss, especially on long days out. Unlike me, I imagine that many riders might prefer something wider with more flare, too.

Aside from comfort, the bars have another issue, which is that they taper immediately after they leave the stem, meaning that it is difficult to fit a computer, bell, or light unless you use a stem mount.

Luckily, thanks to the semi-external cable routing, changing the bars and/or stem would be very easy and reasonably inexpensive.

Aside from that, it is pretty much all good news. The wider 45mm tyres add a modicum of comfort to the front end and, in conjunction with the new carbon layup, give the bike a slightly zingier feel. With the D-shaped carbon seatpost almost at its maximum for my 186cm height, the rear of the bike was super comfortable when seated, with plenty of flex in the post. Of course, this only works when in the saddle, so rough, out-of-the-saddle descents still relied on the tyres and my legs for suspension.

The tyres and wheels were decent enough. Despite the weight, the wheels rolled very smoothly, a sensation accentuated by the freehub’s silence; indeed, a noisier freehub would have been useful in lieu of a bell on some trails! The Crosscut tyres with their smallish knobs performed well enough on dry trails, and weren’t horrible on tarmac sections, but looked like sloppy mud would overwhelm them. Luckily I didn’t experience much of that.

As is so often the case with reasonably priced bikes, the wheels and tyres would be a great place to start any upgrading and weight saving. Although doing so can quickly move a bike out of the reasonably priced category, I did try the Revolt on some lighter carbon wheels, and the improvement in ride feel was instant, but the upgrade would add another 50% to the bike's price.

One area that really doesn’t need any upgrading is the groupset. I’ve used various versions of Shimano’s GRX offering, and, put simply, it just works. Braking performance on the Revolt was excellent – powerful and rub-free, while the shifting was light and accurate. The use of a double chainset goes against gravel’s obsession with single rings, but I am all in favour of it and run a double on my own Topstone; I’ve never had an issue with using a front shifter, and much prefer the range and closeness of gear ratios it offers.

Some will perhaps bemoan Giant’s use of a press-fit bottom bracket, but again I’ve never had a problem with them, and I think on a bike at this price point it’s not unreasonable to use one.

There are plenty of attachment options for riders who like to go long (or just carry the kitchen sink with them on every ride). In addition to the standard two bottle-cage bosses, there are bosses on the fork legs and the top tube. I didn’t use the downtube storage, but it looked to be one of the better versions of this feature, with an easy-to-use mechanism and a secure, rattle-free fit.

I rode the Revolt in both the long and short flip-chip settings, and while it was interesting to play with, I can’t say I’d have missed it if it wasn’t there. I think it felt a little zippier and more playful in the shorts setting, but it could easily have been confirmation bias.

Making the switch is a 10 minute job; rear wheel out, rear mech off, undo both dropouts with a small hex key, flip them and tighten, replace rear mech, undo brake caliper, flip the adaptor, refasten caliper and set up on the rotor, replace rear wheel. Easy enough at home, but not a realistic option for trailside use. I suspect most riders might change it once and then just leave it alone.

Giant says that tyre clearance is reduced from 53mm to 45mm in the short setting, but there looked to be plenty of room for 50mm tyres to me, even with a front mech.

Value

The 2026 Revolt Advanced 2 is actually £200 cheaper than the 2025 model and, at £2,500/ $2,800, represents pretty decent value.

Handlebar issues aside, you could quite happily ride the Revolt as it is day in, day out on all sorts of terrain and never think twice about it.

You could fit a dropper post, flip the chip, max out the tyre clearance and stick on a flex stem with big bars and blat around having loads of fun. Or you could bolt on a bunch of luggage and head off for the horizon.

All of which to say that the Revolt is a versatile, easy-to-ride gravel bike; if I were told that this was to be my only gravel bike for the next few years, I would be happy enough.

I really liked the seated compliance offered by the combination of the frame and D-shaped seatpost, and the tyre size increase to 45mm is a great upgrade. I would consider budgeting for a different set of handlebars, though, for better balance and easier mounting of gadgets.

Four stars feels a bit mean for such a competent and enjoyable bike, but I'm not sure that buyers at this price point should be expected to fork out more cash to sort out the cockpit.

Tech spec

• Price: £2,499/ $2,800
• Brand: Giant
• Frame: Revolt Adv 2 Advanced-grade composite
• Fork: Revolt Adv 2 Advanced-grade composite
• Weight: 9.6kg (actual, 56cm)
• Sizes: XS, S, M, ML, L, XL
• Levers: Shimano GRX RX-610, 2x12
• Brakes: Shimano BR-RX410hydraulic, Giant MPH rotors, 160mm/160mm front/rear
• Rear derailleur: Shimano GRX RX-820
• Front derailleur: Shimano GRX RX-820
• Crankset: Shimano FC-RX610-2, 46/30T
• Bottom bracket: Shimano, press-fit
• Cassette: Shimano CS-HG710, 12-speed, 11-36T
• Chain: KMC X12L-1
• Wheels: Giant P-X2 , alloy
• Tyres: Giant Crosscut Grip, 700x45c, tubeless
• Bar: Giant Contact XR D-Fuse, 31.8mm
• Stem: Giant Contact AeroLight, -10 degree
• Seatpost: Giant D-Fuse, composite, 14mm offset
• Saddle: Giant Grit

Rapha has updated its Brevet range, with the latest Women's Cargo Bib Shorts introducing an easy-pee design – a feature notably absent from the previous generation and a source of criticism among riders. Given that they are the bib shorts of choice for two-time Transcontinental Race winner Jana Kesenheimer, I was keen to see whether they lived up to their reputation.

Design details

Rapha says the shorts are constructed from lightweight, durable, high-performance Italian fabrics - a blend of 64% recycled polyamide and 36% elastane - chosen to withstand the demands of regular riding and repeated washing, something of a prerequisite for the best cargo bib shorts.

The upper section incorporates Rapha’s nature-break design, using supple elasticated bib straps. Rapha’s ‘nature break optimisation’ uses a simple pull-down system, now a familiar concept among premium cycling brands, allowing the shorts to be lowered without removing layers. The fabrics are engineered to recover their shape afterward, helping to maintain the chamois's correct position and comfort.

The chamois has been revised for Version III. Rapha describes it as a dual-density pad featuring an antibacterial topsheet and quick-drying foam layers, designed to maintain comfort and performance over consecutive days in the saddle.

Storage is generous, with four compartments built into the design: two identical thigh pockets and two integrated lower-back pockets. One of the rear pockets is zipped, providing a secure place for valuables.

Version III features fewer panels, low-profile flatlock stitching and laser-cut hems, all intended to improve comfort and reduce irritation on longer rides.

The shorts are available in sizes XXS to XL, with three colour options: Black, Dark Olive and Dark Forest – the latter two being muted military-inspired brown and green tones, which are often a favourite choice for gravel bike clothing.

Performance

I’ve been testing a size medium, as suggested by Rapha’s size guide. The fit is perfect, therefore, I’d advise using its sizing guide. I did find the leg length to be longer than average. If you like short shorts, these might not be the best choice for you.

The hot weather we’ve enjoyed recently has provided perfect conditions to assess fabric and chamois performance; on warm, consecutive days in the saddle, a poorly performing chamois can quickly become a source of discomfort, so its ability to manage moisture and maintain comfort is crucial.

Rapha’s ‘dual-density Endurance Seamless Chamois’ feels slightly stiffer than many pads I’ve tested. That said, it has softened a little after several washes. In use, I found it to be well positioned within the shorts, while the neatly finished edge transitions smoothly into the main body of the garment. Combined with the pad’s sleek surface, this has delivered comfortable, irritation-free riding over extended periods. While cycling I never sensed a build-up of moisture inside the shorts, indeed the pad is among the quickest drying (post-laundering) that I have comes across.

The main body of fabric dries remarkably quickly. Indeed, this fabric is wonderfully comfortable against the skin – not overly compressive but snug enough not to budge over the course of a long ride. The raw cut edges and subtle grippers look and feel great. Talking aesthetics, I love the understated branding too, though a subjective point to be fair.

The bib strap material is comparable to that used on Lusso’s latest Paragon Bib Shorts, feeling robust while still offering the stretch required for the comfort-break system to work. I’m less convinced by the cross-strap arrangement, though. It can take a little adjustment to get the straps sitting completely flat when first pulling on the shorts.

That is a relatively minor issue - once positioned correctly, the arrangement is extremely comfortable - but my main criticism is that it doesn’t offer quite the same freedom of movement as some other pull-down designs, such as those from Lusso and Velocio. This may be partly down to the crossover straps, although the slightly taller rear panel here could also be denying wriggle room. In fairness, when paired with the Brevet Jersey tested alongside it, the higher-back design makes sense, as the jersey itself is shorter than average in the body. Personally, I’d want a longer-bodied jersey and a lower cut short to aid easier calls of nature.

The storage offered by the Brevet Cargo Shorts is among the most generous I’ve encountered. When the bike's carrying capacity is limited, four pockets prove genuinely useful. Cargo shorts have been around long enough for manufacturers to have refined the design of thigh pockets. Maybe it’s no surprise then that Rapha has struck an excellent balance between capacity, reduced seam stress and security.

I felt confident carrying my smartphone, complete with a 6.7-inch screen, in the thigh pockets, with no fear of it sliding out. The fabric and attachment points showed no signs of being overly stressed, either. My personal preference is to use thigh pockets for snacks, but a phone provides a useful test of both seam durability and security for weightier items. There’s easily enough room for six regular-sized energy bars in just one single thigh pocket.

The rear pockets are less spacious, although no less practical. They comfortably accommodate items such as credit cards, a GPS cycling computer (removed from the bike when heading into a shop) and a multi-tool, among other essentials. There’s also an added sense of security for more valuable items (with one of these being zipped). For me, if I’m wearing a traditional cycling jersey, rear pockets may compromise on comfort. However, they are undeniably brilliant if you are wearing a more casual top, or use them for storing valuable items when leaving the bike for short periods of time.

The shorts feature integrated reflective detailing, although I'm not entirely convinced by its placement; positioned beneath the thigh pockets, it's ineffective when those pockets are full. Even empty, I wonder if the mesh pocket fabric (on the black shorts I tested) is partially hindering the reflective elements full potential?

VALUE

For me, the standout features of Rapha’s Brevet Cargo Bib Shorts are the chamois, the excellent main-body fabric, and the generous cargo storage. The comfort-break design is undoubtedly useful, but it isn't class-leading in my experience.

Among the key rivals, Lusso's £140 /$191 Terra Bib Shorts offer two cargo pockets, though they lack the brand's Paragon comfort-break system. Velocio's Adventure Cargo Bib Shorts (£219/ $299) feature the company's FlyFree design alongside three pockets, while 7mesh's MK3 Cargo Bib Shorts appear to be Rapha's closest rival on paper. Like the Brevet, they offer four pockets in similar positions, a dedicated Pull2P comfort-break system and a women's-specific performance chamois with higher-density foam. At £200/ $230 versus Rapha's RRP of £260/ 360, they may also represent better value. That said, I haven't tested the 7mesh shorts, so I can't draw meaningful comparisons on comfort, fit or long-distance performance.

Overall, Rapha's Women’s Brevet Cargo Bib Shorts impress with their comfort, storage and quality of construction. My only real reservation is the pull-down comfort-break design, which I found offered less freedom of movement than some rival systems. Whether that proves an issue will depend on individual fit, but at this price I'd be tempted to try the 7mesh MK3 before deciding whether Rapha's premium is justified.

Tech specs

• Price:  £260/ 360
• Chamois style: Endurance
• Storage: Four pockets
• Leg type: Shorts
• Colours: Black (tested), Dark Olive and Dark Forest
• Sizes: XXS, XS, S, M, L, XL

Judging by the number of Van Rysel shorts, jerseys, shoes, and helmets that I saw paired with expensive bikes and other premium kit on a recent trip to Mallorca, the brand has been very successful in attracting keen cyclists as well as more casual users.

Its sponsorship of the Decathlon CMA CGM WorldTour team has both raised its profile and given it a reason to produce more performance-oriented products alongside its more budget-conscious offerings.

By and large, most of the gear we have tested from Van Rysel has impressed us, not only for its value for money but also for its genuine performance. However, if there is one area where shortcuts and scrimping should be avoided, it's bib shorts. Nothing ruins a ride as fast as uncomfortable shorts, and while the steady rise in price of many of the best bib shorts isn’t a welcome one, it is always well worth buying the comfiest shorts possible.

So, do Van Rysel’s RCR-R 5 Bib Shorts provide a worthwhile, cash-saving alternative?

Design details

The RCR Bib Shorts are built around an Elastic Interface pad, a brand used by many manufacturers. Van Rysel says that the Performance 2.5 HD pad uses a ‘very high-density foam under the top layer for maximum effectiveness on long-distance rides to give you enduring comfort, guaranteed for up to five hours’. The Rhombus fabric used is promised to prevent harmful bacteria.

Well, that’s the marketing spiel anyway.

In reality, I wouldn’t describe the pad as particularly ‘high-density’, it's at the softer end of the seat pads that I have used, with a relatively basic feel to it although it does have a pressure relief channel down the centre; this is not necessarily a bad thing, one of my favourite pads of all time, the original Assos S5 pad, had a similar feel.

The shorts’ material is a touch lighter than some modern, highly compressive fabrics, although VR claims the shorts offer some compression. The main body material extends up between the shoulder blades, acting as a yoke for the straps, with some large perforations in the top section for breathability.

To keep the shorts in place, there is a very deep section of silicone grippers at the bottom of each raw-cut leg – 6cm of the stuff to be precise.

The straps are white in colour, with reinforced bonded sections where they join the main fabric at the front. The branding is limited to a small ‘Van Rysel’ printed on the right thigh and a tiny ‘RCR’ behind the left thigh – all pretty subtle.

Pine Green, Cashmere Beige, Concrete Grey and Smoked Black are the colours for men, while women just get Concrete Grey and Smoked Black. Sizes for men are S to XXL and XS to XL for women.

Performance

Having been very impressed with Van Rysel’s winter bib tights, I had high hopes for the RCR shorts, and for the most part, they lived up to my expectations.

The fit was good. A large was the right size for me at 73kg and 186cm, and marries up with sizing for brands like Assos, Castelli and Velocio. Leg length was great, with the hem long enough for my personal preference and again, in line with Castelli and Velocio.

The front of the shorts was also a good height, sitting above my belly button, so there shouldn’t be any issues with gaps between shorts and jersey when off the bike. Strap length and elasticity were spot on, holding things in the right place on the bike yet without discomfort when standing upright.

The only area that was less than slick was the cut around the crotch. Baggy is far too strong a word for it, but there did seem to be a bit too much fabric, leading to crow’s-feet-style creases radiating outwards across my groin and upper thighs. Only a sartorial issue, but one which I haven’t noticed before with more established premium brands.

I was able to put the shorts and matching jersey through their paces in the UK and for a couple of weeks of warmer weather in Mallorca and Gran Canaria. The RCR bib shorts performed well, and if that sounds like damning with faint praise, it kind of is.

Whereas I found the Elastic Interface decent enough when I used it in Van Rysel’s winter tights for 2-3-hour cold-weather rides, I don’t think it stood up as well for full days out on the bike. After a few hours, I became aware of the saddle and would have preferred a higher-density cushion, especially on day four or five of the trip. There was no specific issue, but I did find myself wishing for a different pad by the middle of the afternoon - maybe my backside is not as hardy as some, but VR’s promised five hours plus of comfort is a little optimistic for me.

Value

At £90/ $119, the RCR shorts are operating in a very competitive pricing segment. This means that judgment of them must be in this context, and as such, I think that they fall slightly short of perfection in a couple of areas.

The fit and design are very good, with decent leg length and comfort, but the fabric provides a bit less support than I am used to these days, and the cut around the crotch could be better, too. I accept that there is an element of personal preference in this, though, and some riders might prefer the less compressive feel of the RCRs.

I also think that the pad should be a bit better for this price. It was fine for short- to medium-length rides, but it would not be my first choice if I were planning to spend more than four hours in the saddle. It is a bit too soft for that in my opinion.

However, most problematic in terms of value is that Van Rysel’s terribly named but excellent Water-repellent Winter Road Cycling Bib Tights, RCR Extreme, use the same pad and straps, are full-length, and have warm, windproof panels, yet cost £10 less than these shorts. Makes no sense to me.

Ultimately, the RCR Bib Shorts are pretty decent, but they could really do with being a bit cheaper or using a better pad to offer the kind of value we are used to seeing from Van Rysel.

Tech spec

• Price: £90/ $119
• Chamois style: Race
• Storage: None
• Leg type: Shorts
• Colours: Smoked Black (tested), Pine Green, Cashmere Beige, Concrete Grey
• Sizes:  S, M, L, XL, XXL

It’s been a long time coming, but it finally seems safe to say that wide tyres are here to stay. From road race bikes all the way up to gravel and adventure rigs, tyre clearances have grown to provide space for more rubber, and the comfort, reduction in rolling resistance and increased grip that goes along with it. And at long last, we’re finally seeing wider wheels become more prevalent, with updated profiles to match the aerodynamics and shaping of modern tyres.

Enve may not have been the first to the wide-wheel party, but the company made a splash when it launched three new gravel wheels earlier this year. The "Big Dawgs," the G SES 6.7 Pro, certainly got most of the attention, and rightfully so: these are wheels that mean business. In fact, Enve claims to be the "outright fastest gravel wheel on the market."

While the 6.7 Pro appears to be extremely fast, especially on long, open gravel courses like Unbound, Enve’s shallower option in the lineup, the G SES 4.5 Pro, provides a much more versatile option for most riders. They’re lighter, for one, and less susceptible to crosswinds, making them easier for smaller riders to control. And while they may lose out a bit in terms of absolute speed, the 30 mm internal width of the 4.5 rim enables riders to safely run tyres as narrow as 40 mm, something that isn’t possible with the mega-wide 35 mm internal width of the 6.7s.

Design details

The G SES 4.5 Pro is the lightest option in Enve’s gravel lineup. The rims themselves are front- and rear-specific: the front measures 49 mm, while the rear is 55 mm deep. Internal width is 30 mm, while external width is 37.6 mm (37.8 by my calipers). Enve states that the rims are “tuned for aerodynamic performance with high volume tyres between 44-52 mm.”

The wide rims are mated to Enve’s top-spec Innerdrive Pro hub, which features ceramic bearings, oversized stainless-steel ratchets, and a light-action spring to reduce drag. The hubs are laced with Alpina alloy nipples and Alpina Ultralite straight-pull spokes. Like most Enve wheels, the nipples are located internally within the rim. Total system weight, including rim tape and tubeless valves, is 1,482 grams, per my scale. The spokes and hubs both have a polished silver finish, visually differentiating the Pro wheels from the standard G SES 4.5 wheelset (which shares the same rims as the Pro version) and adding a bit of pizzazz.

In the box are multiple freehub bodies, and swapping them is straightforward; it can be done without tools in about three minutes. I conducted most of my testing with an HG driver installed, but also briefly tested the XD driver. Underway, the freehub makes a loud but not deafening noise that’s decidedly more of a growl than a high-pitched buzz.

The rims are hookless and ship with tubeless tape and valves installed. As this is a gravel-specific design, Enve has designed these rims with impacts in mind and made the bead very wide to blunt the edge and help prevent pinch flats. The width of the sidewall measures a very robust 3.8 mm, similar to what one might find on a mountain bike rim. Max tyre pressure is 50psi and the minimum approved tyre size is 40mm.

Enve manufactures its rims in the USA and covers its products with a limited lifetime warranty for materials conformance, as well as a limited lifetime crash-replacement policy.

Performance

These wheels are fast, full stop. Are they the fastest option out there? It’s tough to say. Enve’s road-going wheels seem to be working fairly well for Tadej and his UAE teammates, so it stands to reason that the equivalent gravel version would also be pretty quick.

In my time spent riding these wheels, I tested the G SES 4.5 PRO wheelset with two different tyres. I started with Schwalbe’s 2.1 inch/55 mm Thunder Burt tyres, a fast-rolling knobby tyre that is my go-to for dry gravel conditions. Installation was smooth, and the (slightly undersized) tyres measured around 54 mm, just over the upper edge of Enve’s recommended tyre size.

For such a wide rim, the G SES 4.5 Pro is impressively light. I didn’t try to ascertain any measurable aerodynamic gains during my testing, but at higher speeds, the wheels clearly make a difference to the bike’s speed. Good wheels feel stable and encourage you to push, to dig deeper into your pedal stroke and tuck your head that little bit more to eke out another .5 kph. That feeling of liveliness at speed, where the entire system is working harmoniously, is addictive, and these wheels possess it.

I also tested the wheels with a tyre at the opposite end of the recommended range: Vittoria’s 42 mm Corsa PRO Control tyres. Setup with these tyres also proved uneventful, and riding on this (slightly) narrower rubber gave me a good feel for the character of the wheels without the interference caused by the knobby tread and sheer volume of the 55s. In this configuration, the 4.5 Pros felt very much like a standard aero road wheel, with good lateral stiffness and direct road feedback coming through to the rider. Here again, the wheels performed at their best when ridden aggressively, seemingly coming alive once my speedometer ticked over 45 kph. I think the wheels are at their best, performance-wise, with a slightly narrower, firmer tyre. According to Enve, these wheels are optimised for 44-52 mm, but based on my time spent riding them, I liked them the most with rubber in the 40-45 mm range.

Now obviously I wasn’t privy to the engineering discussions that Enve’s designers had about wide tyres and aerodynamics. Clearly, they know what they’re doing. With that said, I wonder why Enve decided not to make these rims even wider. I presume that making them more similar in width to the tyre widths they are supposedly designed for would improve their aerodynamic performance. Perhaps the extra-deep 6.7 wheels are better suited to tyres on the wide end of the range.

Regarding the hubs, I didn’t have any issues during my testing, but I do wonder how they will hold up over the long term, given that they are touted as a race-day-tuned setup. Enve uses the same hubs on its top-level road wheels, so the tech is not new, but then the demands (and conditions) of gravel racing are unique.

Also notable about these wheels is their look: big logos and silver spokes tend to draw eyeballs, for better or worse. If you want people to notice your bike, these wheels provide an efficient, albeit very expensive, way to achieve that. Paired with a titanium bike, the shiny silver with a bit of dust on it looks, to my eye, quite proper. If understated is more your thing, these wheels may not be the best option.

Value

Enve has a reputation for making high-quality products and pricing them at the top end of the market. In my experience, it also provides a commensurate level of customer service and warranty coverage, which helps to justify the cost somewhat. At $3,100/ £3,500/ €3,899, the G SES 4.5 Pro wheels aren’t at the very tippy-top of the carbon wheel market, but they’re close.

If you’re interested in Enve but don’t want to spend quite that much, the standard G SES 4.5 wheels use brass nipples instead of alloy and have black hubs and spokes instead of silver, but are otherwise indistinguishable from the Pro version. These wheels cost a still quite substantial sum of $2,850.

Zipp’s 303 XPLR SW wheelset is another close competitor. Specifications-wise, they’re quite similar. The internal and external widths are very close, as is the weight; however, the Zipp wheels cost a third as much at $2,200. Having ridden both, I would say the performance is indistinguishable.

It also must be said that the rise of direct-to-consumer wheel brands out of China, of which several, like BTLOS and Light Bicycle are now well-known and highly regarded, also make wheels with similar dimensions for even less. These products may not have the same wind-tunnel chops as a top-level name brand, but they aren’t far off.

Enve makes a very good product, but not one that screams value. If you want the best, flashiest wheel on the market, these are right up there. I could find no discernible faults with them, and I rode them hard. But for the money, that’s the way it should be.

Tech spec

• Price: $3,100/ £3,500/ €3,899
• Weight: 1,480g (claimed), 1,482g (actual, including tape and valves)
• Internal width: 30 mm
• Minimum tyre size: 40 mm
• External width: 37.6
• Depth: 49 mm front, 55 mm rear

The Scope Artech 4.A wheels are the all-road model in the Artech range, hence the ‘.A’ label. There are also the .G gravel and .T triathlon lines, as well as the standard Artech. All of the wheels share the same technologies, however.

Design details

The wheels are built around a brand new hub, a source of much of the weight trimming. It’s made from the ‘Topology Optimised’ 3D-printed Scalmalloy material. Scalmalloy is primarily composed of aluminum, magnesium, and scandium and is designed to be incredibly lightweight while also being able to be made into highly intricate shapes.

This is why the hubs are somewhat reminiscent of bone structures, which are formed by the direction of the stresses applied to them. The principle is applied to the hubs to make them strong against torsional, lateral, and vertical forces, with the aim of offering unparalleled stiffness, something that many of the best road bike wheels look to attain.

Internally, Scope uses its Diamond Ratchet SL, which is made of titanium and uses a diamond-like carbon coating for durability. There's a 36T ratchet with a 10-degree engagement, while the bearings are either standard SKF or CeramicSpeed, available at an additional cost.

The reasonably deep Carbonlite Aerospokes provide strength and improved aerodynamics. On the front wheel, there are six radial spokes on the non-rotor side and 12 two-cross spokes on the rotor side, while the rear also uses a 2:1 ratio with 8 one-cross spokes on the non-drive side and 16 two-cross spokes on the drive side to better balance the asymmetric forces through the drivetrain.

The rims are another unique aspect of Scope's design and stand out from the crowd. Whereas most wheels are smooth or feature dimples like Zipp, Scope has used patented AeroScales. Scope claims they “generate velocity streaks travelling at different speeds over our rim surface. This has a stabilising effect on the airflow and reduces drag.”

The rim profile is also designed using Scope’s Algorithm Enhanced Aerodynamics (AEA) to be as aerodynamic as possible. Local Reinforcement carbon technology is then applied around the spoke holes to strengthen those areas, resulting in less carbon required across the entire wheel.

This results in a pair of wheels that, with rim tape and valves installed, weigh 1,206g - impressively light for a 45mm rim with 25mm internal width and 33.84mm external width. The rims still use hooks rather than microhooks or hookless; for a wheel this light, they buck the trend by not specifying a weight limit.

All standard road hub options are available from Shimano, Campagnolo and SRAM, while off-road options such as Shimano Microspline and Campagnolo N3W are also available. White or Black graphic options can be specified upon purchase. The wheels also feature a very smart tool bag and proper wheel bags.

Performance

Fitting tyres is always the first part of testing wheels. I personally don’t like rim tape as much as solid rim bed profiles. However, this means additional material and external spoke nipples, which can marginally impact aerodynamics. Traditionally, I have found Acope wheels quite tight to get tyres onto, and that remains the case with the Artech. The 25mm internal width also makes fitting standard road tyres, optimised for 21mm internal widths, a bit more challenging.

What really does strike you is the weight, or rather lack of. With tyres, rotors and all elements fitted, these are a properly lightweight set of wheels, especially considering their 45mm depth, and out on the road, it makes for a tangible difference. Aerodynamics has taken the market by storm, but unless you go from a round-tubed bike with shallow rims to a full-on hyperbike, I don’t find much difference from one product to the next. That’s not to say the benefits don’t exist, but 33kph feels very similar to 30kph even if that is 10% faster. What is noticeable, and remains something highly romanticised by cyclists, are lightweight components.

Every acceleration away from a junction or traffic lights, every surge up a steep incline, your efforts are rewarded in spades. Combining a very lightweight hub with a lightweight rim, where rotational weight/inertia has a greater effect during changes in velocity, the Artech feels nimble under acceleration. I have noticed a genuine difference accelerating up climbs with these wheels. At a constant pace, the weight does help, but is not as perceivable. However, for crit racing or races with any climbing, these are a superb choice.

Adding to this accelerative performance is the stiffness. The aforementioned topology-optimised hubs are an interesting design, carefully sculpted to deal with the directional forces that the wheels come under from lateral movements, torsional twisting forces, and the vertical forces from the spoke tension and weight. Even with a relatively low spoke count by disc-brake wheel standards, the wheels are incredibly stiff, reacting well to acceleration, cornering, and braking with no lull. It’s not at all jarring, but just makes the wheels feel very connected with the frame and pedalling forces. The Carbonlite spokes may also help with this, given their tensile strength.

Aero-bladed spokes also contribute to the aerodynamic performance, as does the rim profile. At 45mm deep, these are not quite a dedicated ‘flat day’ aero offering, sitting more in the all-round category. However, I feel no discernible difference between these and the Vision Metron 60 SL wheels, which I’ve previously reviewed and really liked. I can’t tell if the scales help or the AEA rim, but a telling sign is that professional teams use these unmissable wheels even when they're not sponsored by Scope; part of why the road and time trial variants are often out of stock is due to WorldTour purchases.

In crosswinds, the 45mm depth, very wide profile, and scales seem to result in a wheel that reacts in a predictable manner. They still feel the forces of the wind, but it has been consistent and reliable, so easily controllable, so much so that I was able to remove a gilet in some crosswinds without too much trouble.

The Scalmalloy material can react to rain and water, giving a discolouration and surface texture shift if the wheels are not properly maintained. Scope provides a cleaning spray and a cloth for these wheels and instructs owners to properly clean the hubs after rides in the rain or after cleaning the bike with water.

It has no performance impact on the wheels, I have been told; it is purely an aesthetic byproduct of the material, and one the brand will hopefully provide a solution for. However, it does feel a bit odd that wheels this expensive require a special treatment. But then looking after a Ferrari requires a lot of expensive additional specialist care compared to a Honda Jazz - that’s the price of performance in some cases. But what a price it is.

Value

On the face of it a £3498 / $4398 for a pair of bicycle wheels is ludicrous. You can buy a reasonable carbon bike, even with electronic gears and carbon wheels, for that amount of money. It’s not as extreme as Lightweight’s Obermayer Evo Disc Carbon Road Wheelset Tubeless Ready Schwartz Ed, which is £7,559/ $8,695. Even the Princeton Carbonworks Peak 4550 Evo starts at around £3,799/ $3,150, while the new ENVE SES 4.5 Pro starts at £4,100/ $3,750. In this context, the Scope actually appears to be good value, as they are lighter and cheaper than the competition, have no weight limit, and are all-road-usable wheelsets.

However, compared to the likes of the Vision Metron 60 SL, which are £1,000 / $2,000 cheaper, it’s hard to say these wheels are that much better. Even more so looking at the likes of the Scribe Élan SL 40 wheelset (we've reviewed the SL 50), which is only a claimed 40g heavier but comes in at £1,199 and features ceramic bearings as standard rather than a £500 add-on.

Realistically, the Scope Artech 4.A wheels are not good value for money. They are firmly in the halo category, where value for money becomes less of a consideration and people are buying these because they want the best, even if that comes at £1,000 for a watt or 50g saving. However, in raw performance terms, they are exceptional, and I would argue, among premium offerings, potentially the best option available.

Tech specs

• Price: £3,498/ $4,398
• Weight: 1,206g
• Hubset: Artech 3D printed
• Freehub options: Shimano HG11/12, SRAM XDR, Campagnolo
• Rim depth: 45mm front/rear
• Internal rim width: 25mm
• Spoke count: 18/24 front/rear
• Rim: Hooked

Van Rysel is Decathlon’s own cycling brand, with everything from clothing, shoes and helmets to complete bikes available. Its sponsorship of a WorldTour team has meant that over the last few years it has really stepped up its game and it now produces lots of great products that are generally good value as well as high performance.

As the price of cycling clothing rises, with £200/ $200+ jerseys not unusual, it's fantastic to see lower-priced options available that don’t seem to sacrifice much in performance or style.

Design details

Van Rysel’s RCR Jersey is a modern, lightweight top with what they call ‘Pro Fit’, meaning that it is very close-fitting, similar to many of the best cycling jerseys. Two fabrics have been used in its construction, with ‘Amigo’, a slightly denser material over the chest and back, and a lighter, more mesh-like material down the sides, over the shoulders, and for the sleeves.

The collar isn’t quite as low-cut as some jerseys, but is still pretty minimalist, while the sleeves are a good, bicep-covering length, with a raw-cut finish complete with micro-dot silicone grips. The entire hem is elasticated, with a silicone gripper running around the inside, and the front zip locks when flipped down, so it stays in place.

In addition to the expected three rear pockets, there is a horizontally zipped security pocket on the middle pocket and two smaller, extra pockets on each hip; ideal for sticky gel wrappers. The required care labels are another neat touch, attached with a soft fabric tab so that when they are cut out, the remaining stub isn't scratchy; it's a feature I’d previously only seen on high-end garments.

I liked the green fade colourway with pink logos and motifs, but I have no idea what the wording ‘Embrace the light’ means on the back? It sounds more like something you’d say to someone on their deathbed than words of motivational encouragement!

Along with the Pine Green, Lemonade Yellow, Ultra White, and Indigo Blue are available in XS to XXL, with the jersey claimed to be unisex.

Performance

As ever with Van Rysel, my initial impressions were pretty good, and I was impressed with the fit and feel of the jersey. It was snug but comfortable, and certainly a much better cut than the similarly budget-orientated Madison Flux Jersey. It is perhaps on the smaller side of medium though, and I’m not convinced that it would work particularly well for many women, despite its unisex claims, but that isn’t really for me to say.

I wore it in cool weather with arm warmers (when the sleeve grippers helped keep them in place) and in 30°C+ weather in Mallorca and Gran Canaria, where the fabrics coped perfectly well with comfort and moisture management.

The lightness and stretch of the materials allowed full, unrestricted movement whilst keeping the jersey flap-free at speed; just don’t expect much by way of warmth if the temperature drops.

A couple of minor criticisms, before one major one: Personally, I think that elasticating the front half of the bottom hem and the attempt at hiding the front zip behind small plackets are both unnecessary and slightly cheapen the look of the jersey, but that might be subjective.

What is objective is that the rear pockets are too shallow.

A quick survey of pockets on some of my other jerseys (Castelli, Santini, Assos, and Velocio) revealed an average depth of roughly 16-17cm, whereas the Van Rysel RCR pockets are only about 13cm deep. To be fair, I didn’t lose anything out of them, and it certainly made accessing them a bit easier, but I spent more time than usual patting my pockets mid-ride to check that nothing had made a bid for freedom. My phone (a modestly sized iPhone 14), for instance, protruded noticeably rather than being safely tucked away; I certainly wouldn’t want to ride off-road with the RCR jersey and anything valuable in the pockets.

It’s an odd misstep by Van Rysel, as whilst some things can be forgiven on lower-priced products, deeper pockets wouldn’t really have affected the cost at all. On the plus side, I liked the small side pockets that remained virtually invisible until I needed to stash some wrappers, after all, no one wants their phone, gilet or keys covered in sticky gel residue.

Value

The RCR Jersey is really good, but I think that the pocket issue is a problem at any price. It retails for £60/ $89.99, and for that it offers a well-cut, comfortable jersey with decent fabrics and a modern aesthetic, which should make it great value.

For me, though, the pocket security costs at least half a star. If the jersey was more expensive, then I would probably penalise it more, but to give Van Rysel credit, the value inherent in such a nice jersey offsets it to a degree.

It is certainly worth popping into your local Decathlon, trying one on, and seeing if your ride essentials fit safely into the pockets; if so, it's certainly good value for money.

Tech spec

• Price: £60/ $89.99
• Pockets: Six
• Fit: Race
• Type: Short sleeve
• Colours: Pine Green/Delicate Green (tested), Pink, Pine Green, Lemonade Yellow, Ultra White, Indigo Blue/Delicate Green
• Sizes: XS, S, M, L, XL, XXL

The Luxe is Velocio’s best-selling short, and has been for some time. This revised version features changes to the legs, waist, and straps that Velocio claims elevate the Luxe shorts to an even higher level of performance.

We loved the previous version of the Luxe bib shorts from the American brand, which we tested four years ago, so can the latest iteration still impress?

Design details

In keeping with Velocio’s compression claims, the Luxe fabric is fairly substantial and feels noticeably more robust than many of the best bib shorts. The legs only have two panels to keep potentially irritating seams to a minimum, which, coupled with the matte black finish, gives the shorts a very minimalist look, broken up only by the small, reflective ‘Velocio’ wording on the right thigh, an even smaller logo on the left thigh, and one on the left buttock.

Equally subtle are the ‘hems’, although there aren’t any in the traditional sense. As with many (but not all) modern shorts, the leg ends are raw-cut, with about 3cm of silicone grippers printed on the inside. The waist of the shorts is Lycra-bound, however, and sits higher than the previous model – over rather than under the belly button.

The straps have also been upgraded; the natty white straps are now joined up the rear with a mesh panel to help them sit in just the right place, and no longer cross over each other. The motivational words ‘Go the distance’ are printed on one strap with ‘Luxe’ on the other.

One thing Velocio clearly thinks didn’t need improvement is the seat pad, which remains unchanged. It is a proprietary unit rather than one that has been bought in, and uses multi-density layers for comfort and perforations for breathability and moisture management, with reduced padding along the centre to reduce pressure. The front, thinner section is cup-shaped to keep everything in place.

From a sustainability point of view, the shorts are made from 57% Polyamide Recycled (with Elastane making up the remaining 43%), arrive in compostable packaging, and Velocio is signed up to 1% for the Planet, so 1% of sales are donated to environmental organisations.

Velocio’s ‘Ride with confidence’ guarantee allows the shorts to be bought, worn, washed and then returned for a full refund if not comfortable – nicely reassuring given it's an expensive item.

The Luxe bib short comes in sizes XS to XXXXL for men and XXS to XXXL for women, with the same six colours - Black, Navy, Plum Truffle, Deep Lichen, Sulphur and Black Olive - for both.

Performance

Pulling on the Luxe shorts, there is no doubt about their compression credentials. My usual size large in shorts felt somewhat ambitious until they were in place, at which point they felt perfect. Close-fitting (even for cycling shorts), but unrestrictive, they felt great, and I think that the latest tweaks to the fit are very worthwhile.

As someone with a slightly unhealthy obsession with neat tan lines and a vain hatred of the pale tidemark exposed by short shorts, I found the leg length excellent and matched my favoured Castelli Espresso bib shorts. Equally, the higher front eliminated any chance of an unsightly gap between jersey and shorts, and smothered rather than accentuated any post-lunch paunch.

I wore the shorts on both road and gravel rides, with performance flawless whatever the surface. It’s easy to see why they are Velocio's best-selling shorts, despite the price (more on that later). The pad remained comfortable hour after hour, the legs refused to ride up, and they felt secure and supportive for the duration. The fabric felt like it would stand up well to the potential rough-and-tumble of off-roading, although on the flip side, I’m not sure I’d risk a pair of shorts with this price tag if there was too much chance of any arse/gravel interface.

Velocio says that the high-gauge material provides the compression and support that is needed for long days in the saddle, and whilst this is very hard to quantify in performance terms, the Luxe shorts certainly offer great support and stability.

Sitting down after riding out of the saddle required no readjustment, an occurrence which I think often marks the difference between great and merely adequate shorts - the cut, fit and pad design all work very well together.

As ever, the acid test of good cycling gear is that it barely crosses your mind once on the bike; it just does its job, leaving you to concentrate on pushing the pedals back down, and the Luxe shorts did exactly that.

The ride-wash-dry-ride cycle seems to have done them no harm so far, with no evidence of fading or damage

Value

As alluded to above, these are not cheap shorts (though they are by no means the most expensive on the market). A £210/ $299 asking price will have some riders dismissing them instantly, whilst others will think it's perfectly reasonable for comfort and style, and there are plenty of other similarly or higher priced options available. For example, the Castelli Premo Evo bib shorts retail at £300/ $350.

The two items of cycling clothing that I believe are truly worth spending money on are waterproof jackets and bib shorts. Jackets need to be genuinely breathable, whilst shorts need to be as comfortable as possible, so £210/ $299 is not outrageous for multi-hour comfort, but there is also no denying that I have been perfectly happy in shorts costing much less. I’d also rather have multiple pairs of shorts to wear in rotation rather than one pair of pricey pants.

As a garment, they are an easy five stars, with nothing I’d change about them – just a nagging thought that, ideally, shorts shouldn’t need to cost £200/ $200+ to be comfortable.

Tech spec

• Price: £210/ $299
• Chamois style: Race
• Storage: None
• Leg type: Shorts
• Colours: Black (tested), Plum Truffle, Navy, Deep Lichen, Sulphur, Black Olive
• Sizes:  XS, S, M, L, XL, XXL, XXXL, XXXXL

Concept is the new collection from the North American brand Velocio.

It says, “Zero compromises in pursuit of all-out performance and speed. Concept is designed for the sharpest end of the sport, with input from the fastest athletes in gravel”.

However, as far as I can make out, there is nothing particularly gravelly about the jerseys and shorts that make up the range, and in fact the performance aspects of the clothing, similar to many of the best cycling jerseys and the best bib shorts, are equally well suited to on-road use; most of the marketing rhetoric relates to speed, aerodynamics and even skinsuits, so think gravel racers with shaved legs, gels and a thousand-yard stare rather than wild beards, checked shirts and artisan IPAs.

It's the jersey I'm reviewing here, so let's dig into the details...

Design details

Three different fabrics make up the Concept jersey, although precise details are a little thin on the ground. Had it been Assos, then I’m sure each material would have had its own impressive-sounding name, but Velocio merely states ‘93% Polyester, 7% Elastane’ and leaves it at that.

However, the front, shoulders and sides are made from a very light grid-pattern fabric and the back panel is equally light but lacks the grid construction - possibly to increase the protection from the sun? The pockets and two small side panels are made from a lightweight softshell-type material for strength and structure.

On that note, the three pockets are a decent size, but even after extensive searching, the claimed fourth pocket for valuables failed to materialise, although a hidden silicone lip inside each of the pockets should help keep the contents in place. On the plus side, it was nice to see good reinforcement at the pockets, where they were stitched into the lightweight back panel.

The entire bottom hem has a silicone gripper, although there isn’t one on the sleeves, which are, slightly anachronistically, not raw-cut. The collar is low and rather minimalist, taking design cues from the aforementioned skinsuits, no doubt.

A full-length placket behind the zip prevents chest hair from getting caught, and it wraps around the zip top and bottom, acting as a zip garage, while the zip itself is a small YKK number that locks in position. I also like Velocio’s habit of attaching the scratchy care label to the garment with a soft fabric tab, so that when it’s cut out there isn’t a sharp stub remaining.

The Persimmon colour of the test jersey is definitely the brightest option, but there is also Zephyr Blue, Moss Gray and Black available for both sexes, with sizes from XS to XXXL for men and XXS to XXXL for women.

Performance

As is usual with Velocio, the jersey arrived in a non-plastic, compostable bag, which is always nice to see.

Size-wise, the medium was certainly correct for me, and in line with other brands like Castelli, Santini and Assos. It was a snug ‘performance’ fit, but the fabrics used were so light and airy that it never felt claustrophobic or restrictive. Body and sleeve length were good, with the pockets sitting at an accessible height, even with my inflexible shoulders, and the softshell material of them helped phone and food slip in easily. I never did find the zipped pocket mentioned on the website, though.

The weight of the grid fabric meant that this was a warm-weather jersey, with Velocio suggesting 18°C to 26°C as its ideal operating window. Fortunately, a brief period of British summer weather in spring just about crept within those parameters, and I was also able to use it in its more usual habitat, Mallorca, where the temperatures were lovely and warm.

Although I wore the Concept jersey on- and off-road, for me it (and the matching bib shorts) is really road wear. On my gravel bike, I am less bothered about compression and aerodynamics than I am about durability, and I suspect that even without the occasional tumble, trailside vegetation, tight gates and gritty mud would soon make short work of the lightweight fabrics. Of course, others who ride and race much faster than I do off-road would benefit from its fit and features, but I preferred to use it mostly on my road bike.

And as such, it performed very well. Leaving aside the AWOL security pocket, it did everything that you could expect of a high-end jersey. The close fit felt great and didn’t flap in the wind, yet it still had enough give to accommodate a base layer, and the silicone grippers kept it firmly in place. In 30°C Balearic heat, sweat seemed to evaporate as soon as it formed, whether climbing the newly surfaced Col d’Honor or the lengthy Puig Mayor.

In cooler weather, the very low collar and thin fabrics didn’t provide much warmth, and my gilet stayed on a little longer than usual, but that isn’t really a criticism; try the Velocio Luxe Merino if you want a jersey with some extra insulation.

Value

Perhaps it should come as no surprise that a jersey called Concept and billed as zero compromise is not going to be cheap. At £181/ $249, it is certainly at the premium end of the market, although nowhere near its zenith.

Some comfort can be taken from the fact that Velocio is part of the 1% for the Planet scheme and that they offer an unconditional 30-day trial period, and more from the quality of the jersey’s fit, feel and fabrics. Still, we haven’t reached the point where I’m going to say that spending £181/ $249 on one jersey is great value, but it is about par for the course for high-end kit. For comparison, Castelli's high-end Premio Evo Jersey retails for £215/ $300.

If this price range feels reasonable to you for a quality cycling top, then you won't be disappointed by the Concept jersey.

Tech spec

• Price: £181/ $249
• Pockets: Three
• Fit: Race
• Type: Short sleeve
• Colours: Persimmon (tested), Zephyr Blue, Black, Moss Gray
• Sizes: XS, S, M, L, XL, XXL, XXL, XXXL

A newcomer to the cycling shoe market they might be, but Udog founder Alberto Fonte worked for Fizik, Kask and Pinarello before starting the brand, so should know a thing or two about cycling. Started in 2021, it offers a concise range of mid-range to high-end shoes with a distinctive aesthetic and some interesting technology.

Based around its TWS 2.0 (Tension Wrap System) design, the Sempre is a mid-level road shoe with a dial-based lacing design; there is a version that uses laces called the Tensione. There are a number of similarities between this and the Udog Forza gravel shoe, which I also tried and liked, but there are important differences as well.

Design details

The Sempre’s key design feature is the Tension Wrap System, wherein a strap passes under the foot and is tensioned by the single twist dial lace, locking the mid-foot more securely in place. Operating the dial is simple enough: turn one way to tighten and the other to loosen the lace entirely, so no micro-adjust for untightening; if you look closely, you can see the cogs inside the dial through the transparent fascia.

The upper is made from a micro-perforated PU with a decent protective bumper over the blunt toe (but nothing at the heel) and a well-padded tongue. As with the Forza, the Sempre’s tongue is captive down one side so it can’t slip around and become uncomfortable; indeed, the upper cuff of the shoe extends seamlessly around the foot and along the top of the tongue.

Silicone grips inside the heel cup hold the heel in place, and there are perforations in the insole that align with a couple of small slots in the sole unit for airflow. The insole itself is fairly basic, with no alternative arch supports or anything fancy, but it is decorated with an image of a bike rider, which is nice.

Udog gives the Sempre’s nylon-carbon composite sole a stiffness rating of 7, but it isn’t clear what this is relative to? Presumably it is 12, as with other brands, but there is no universally agreed-upon scale.

In addition to the two small ventilation slots, the sole has very subtle rubber heel and toe pieces; these are non-replaceable and not very substantial. Similar to the Forza, the heel of the sole heavily undercuts the heel cup; this is much less of an issue on a road-going shoe, unless you are partial to scrambling about off-road to take photos, at which point it is very easy to damage the upper around the heel on rocks (who? me?).

The weight of a pair of size EU44 Sempres was 620g.

Available in Sempre Total White (as pictured) and Sempre Octane (which is white with black straps and a turquoise bumper). There are no half sizes or a women's version, but the full sizes run from 38 to EU48.

Performance

Strangely, the fit of the Sempre seems to me to be quite different from its sibling shoe, the Forza. While the size EU44 Forza felt snug and well-suited to my low-volume feet, the size 44 Sempre would better fit a higher-volume foot, in my opinion. It isn’t as wide as the blunt toe box makes it look, but on my feet there is excess material over the forefoot, which makes them feel less secure.

The single-dial fastening exacerbates this, as it is impossible to effectively secure the front of the shoe without applying excess pressure to the top section. This also hampers the TWS, which should, in theory, be a good concept; however, the inability to isolate each section renders it slightly impotent. The more expensive Cento model has two dials and probably works much better.

I rode the Sempres at home in the Peak District and up some quite big hills in the French Alps, and unfortunately never quite gelled with them. In part, this was because I was also using the excellent Van Rysel RCR shoes, which fitted me very well, and in part because of the lack of independent lacing adjustability. I spent a lot of time while riding fiddling with the twist dial, trying to get the right balance of front-and-back tension.

On the plus side, the little ventilation slots did offer some noticeable cooling benefits, and on long, hot alpine descents it was interesting to play with my foot angle and feel the airflow increase or decrease. Also, I really like the silicone grips inside the heel cup; they never rubbed or caused irritation and simply provided a highly secure, locked-in feeling without requiring excessive tension on the lacing, which is somewhat of a contrast to the front of the shoe.

The difference in stiffness between the Udogs and the Van Rysels under power, while certainly tangible, never bothered me much, although it was a good demonstration of the difference between a pro shoe and a mid-level product. Prior to wearing either, I had imagined I would wear the RCRs for short, hard rides and default to the softer Sempres for longer outings, but in fact I preferred the Van Rysel shoes for both.

This is a shame, as I really liked the look and simplicity of the Sempre and the idea of a slightly detuned shoe for big days out. The TWS should work well too, but seemed to be less effective here than on the gravel variant – perhaps because of the more substantial upper material on the road shoe?

Value

Ultimately, I was a bit underwhelmed by the Sempre. For me, they were overshadowed by the fit and comfort of the Van Rysel RCR, and by Udog’s own Forza gravel shoe. Whereas I was always happy to wear the Forza, the Sempre was not my default choice.

Of course, fit is a huge part of this, and another rider could, quite justifiably, come to the opposite conclusion, but if I had £160/ $209 to spend on a pair of road shoes, then these would not be top of my list. The TWS concept really is crying out for two dials.

In terms of value, the Sempre is in the right ballpark, though; Specialized’s single-dial Torch 2.0 is a fiver more, and Shimano's similarly stiff RC5 is the same price and only has one Boa, too. Giving it a star rating is tough – 4 stars might seem a bit generous given my comments, but there will be people it fits well. And the style and quality are spot on, and it is great that it offers an alternative fit to lower-volume shoes

If you like the look and idea of the Sempres (which I do), and have high-volume feet (which I don’t), then perhaps save a bit longer and give the two-dial Udog Cento a try.

Tech spec

• Price: £160/ $209
• Weight: 620g (actual, size EU44)
• Outsole: Carbon-nylon composite
• Retention: Single dial (Twist Tech)
• Colours: 2
• Sizes: EU38-48

The Seka ExAero GR frame aims to compete with the best gravel bikes. It bears a striking resemblance to the Chinese brand's Spear aero race bike, its answer to the Specialized Tarmac SL8. There is good reason for this. When developing the Spear, Seka introduced the WindEye aero element at the rear of the bike, designed in conjunction with AeroCoach. Not only does this result in lower drag figures, especially with a rider fitted to the bike, but it also boosts rear compliance significantly, which is important for gravel riding.

Design details

Seka states it has designed the frame using a mix of CFD (computational fluid dynamics) and wind tunnel testing. We can confirm that the Seka Spear performs well in the wind tunnel, at 40km/h anyway, as tested by our sister publication Cyclingnews. Seka also provides a highly transparent White Paper on the design and testing of the frame, something refreshing to see. Testing in the wind tunnel was conducted at yaw angles from -20 to +20 degrees in 2.5-degree increments at a speed of 40km/h, the upper-end average for professional gravel races based on post-race analysis. Using the aero bottles, which are claimed to save 4.6w at 39km/h compared to round bottles, tested against a Seka Spear with round bottles, similar-width bars, but with road wheels and tyres vs the ExAero GR with 45mm tyres, the ExAero GR was only 9.9w slower. This increased to 14.5w once you account for the bottles, but then some of that added drag will be the 45mm tyres. Regardless, impressive for a gravel bike.

When designing the frame, Seka first looked at the speeds and equipment used at the world's biggest gravel races. This led to the quoted tyre clearance of 56mm at the front and 52mm rear. Based on the measured widths of the tyres fitted, this rings true with 4mm clearance either side to account for excessive mud to avoid any frame rub. Impressively, the chainstays are so thin that, as well as accepting 52mm tyres, they also allow for a crank-based power meter such as a 4iiii; on a gravel frame like the Cannondale Topstone, for example, the wider chainstays don’t allow for this without frame rub on the power pod.

I will add that Seka also tested tyre widths and the effect on aero performance and found the difference between a 45mm F/R vs a 50mm F/R was only 2.5w across all yaw angles.

In terms of frame design, some narrowing of tubes, such as the chainstays, did require additional structural support. Seka claims that the lateral stiffness in this area is slightly better than the Spear. Actual numbers quoted are 25.63Nm/mm (force required to deflect the frame by 1mm laterally), while rear triangle vertical compliance is quoted at 106Nm/mm.

Added to the frame is a magnetic internal frame storage. This unlatches easily, and inside a zip-up pouch can accommodate various tools and spares. There is also mounting for bottle cages or bags on the top tube, under the down tube, or behind the seat post. The seatpost itself is clamped with two small bolts at the rear of the seat tube and comes in 0 mm and 15mm offsets. I would advise covering these with tape when gravel racing to avoid them filling with dirt. Finally, frame protectors are fitted to the down tube and BB, as well as to the drive-side chainstay.

Complementing the frame is the Gladius GR one-piece handlebar. This features a 16˚ flare, three width options, and five length options, allowing adjustability at the point of purchase. Without hardware and a computer mount, the 400/460 x 90mm combination weighs a claimed 395g. Reach is 69mm, and drop is 118mm. A rearward flare on the tops, along with an anti-slip coating, is aimed at boosting comfort and control off-road.

Six frame sizes are available, from 49 to 61cm. As the wheelbase increases with size, the trail drops to maintain a balance between stability and agility.

Quoted weight is 980g for an unpainted frame without hardware in size 54cm, but of course, once the internal storage, seatpost, fork, and bars are added, that increases. For comparison, the Cannondale SuperX Lab71 is quoted at sub-900g for a painted size 56cm and ~1,000g for the non-Lab71 spec, while the new Specialized S-Works Crux 5 is quoted at 789g for a 56cm painted frame but 897g for the S-Level frame.

Specifications

For finishing the build, I opted for the Shimano GRX RX820 2x12 groupset (the frame is SRAM UDH-compatible, too). This was mainly to achieve a wide gear range without large jumps between gears so I could keep at my preferred cadence across a range of terrains, and all my wheels use a Shimano freehub. It’s not as light as SRAM Red AXS XPLR, but it costs a lot less, and functionality-wise I do enjoy Shimano. Additionally, this latest groupset includes more features in the E-Tube app as well as hardware-wise.

The bottom bracket is a T47 External BB from WolfTooth. With external and internal seals, it offers lots of protection against dirt and dust typically encountered during gravel races.

The wheels on test are the No.6 G45R 45mm deep gravel wheelset shod with Pirelli Cinturato Gravel M tyres.

Performance

Riding the Seka ExAero GR has been quite a joy in most regards. The geometry of the bike suits me very well, and my biggest plus is the customisation at the point of purchase. I do not ride in a conventional position because I have a long torso and arms and relatively short femurs. This means on larger frames I need an inline seatpost, and a long stem. However, I prefer narrower bars. If I were to get a Specialized for example, it would come with 172.5mm cranks, setback seatpost, and 42cm bars if I was lucky. Here, I can select zero off-set post, and the 120mm x 38cm bars.

Position-wise, the Seka offers a setup that feels more like modern race geometry. The stack is relatively high, but the reach is plenty long enough. It strikes a good balance between stable handling and not being either aggressively long and low or excessively short and high, which would otherwise require a super-long stem to achieve a more race-focused position. Having a 120mm stem is a nice sweet spot for me between the more relaxed steering at higher speeds and the nimbler changes in direction at lower velocities. Around the technical trails in the Forest of Dean, it proved to be snappy and agile yet stable and fast across the fire roads.

The flared bars blend a narrow, aerodynamic hood position with a wider, more controlled, high-leverage position in the drops. The drop is quite shallow, so while not best suited for high-speed cornering on the road, off-road it gives you a great position of stability and strength. I also really like the semi-textured tops, which are useful over bumpy terrain in wet conditions. From my testing to date, the bars aren’t excessively stiff as to be uncomfortable, yet sprinting hard in the drops yields no tangible degree of flex.

The biggest bonus of this bike is the WindEye, which, as mentioned, is designed to offer aerodynamic benefits (I’ll get onto that later) but also add compliance. Racing the Gralloch, a notoriously bumpy gravel race, I was pleasantly surprised that by the end of the event, I frankly had no rear end discomfort, which I have had in previous gravel events while using identical width and pressures on the rear tyre. I’m comparing this to my Cannondale Topstone, a bike with a small suspension pin at the rear. The fact that the Seka feels more comfortable is impressive, but it lacks the compressed squish sensation when putting down power that the Topstone can deliver.

As for tyre clearance, the 45mm tyres I raced with measured 47mm actual, and the the 50mm tyres I fitted measured 53mm. This did cause some rub, due in part to the more aggressive tyre knobs as well as exceeding the recommended clearance. Impressively, these tyres can be accommodated along with a 2x chainring, and even the aforementioned crank arm power pod.

Seka has achieved this with razor-thin chainstays, but it appears to come at a compromise. I am admittedly riding a larger frame, so longer tubes allow for greater movement at the end of the ‘lever’ or tube. Seka assured me that the new chainstays were designed to be stiffer than those on the Spear, while the frame geometries were adjusted to account for different frame sizes and stresses. However, I still found that the lateral stiffness at the rear was lacking. At a more regular power and pace, this was not an issue. Riding at 200-270w everything felt good and shifting worked well. However, when upping the power to higher levels, such as 360 watts and above, I found that shifting quality deteriorated; the lateral flex at the rear of the bike was so pronounced that the chainline was disrupted.

I tested this with four sets of wheels to ensure it wasn’t a wheel-stiffness or hub-bearing issue, and it occurred each time in the same manner. It is more likely to happen on a gravel frame than on a road frame, as longer chainstays mean that, for example, one degree of flex at the BB end of the chainstay results in a larger lateral distance traveled than on a shorter tube. I think the reason for this flex is, firstly, that I am a larger and more powerful rider relative to the overall cyclist population, and secondly, that the aggressively profiled downtube into the BB and the thin chainstays result in a kinetic chain that lacks lateral stiffness. Some bolstering of the BB junctions and increasing chainstay stiffness would likely go some way toward solving this, especially since lateral stiffness has limited impact on the vertical compliance associated with comfort.

I have also been using this bike on the road a lot. I generally use a gravel bike for winter riding thanks to mudguard mounts, large tyre clearances, and frame storage for added spares. No mudguard mounts here though. What has been impressive about the Seka ExAero GR is that, when riding at 30-40km/h, it really does roll along like an absolute rocket. For fast-paced group rides and longer slogs, it holds speed very well. Handling is obviously not as sharp as a dedicated road bike, but I won’t criticise it for not being as good at something it has not been designed for. Indeed, this has now become my preferred bike for riding on the road. I have a Factor Ostro VAM (Gen 1), but based on my experience, the Seka feels faster at my average ride speeds. For a bike that can be used for gravel riding and racing, as well as on the road come rain or shine, the Seka ExAero GR is an attractive offering.

Another super feature of this bike is the fitment points, which give a great degree of flexibility. For flat-out gravel racing, you can limit the use of additional fittings. There is a bolt-on top-tube bag spot, which was common at Unbound this year for aero savings and practical storage. There are also additional bottle mounts on the seat tube (bolts not included) and on the downtube. The downtube features a rubber frame armor fitting, which is perfect for gravel, with an additional one fitted on the top and sides of the drive-side chainstay. These are both areas I have frankly pummelled on my Topstone, so this inclusion is ideal for greater frame longevity. Internally, this downtube fitting also houses the Shimano Di2 battery, which is easily accessible. This lowers the centre of mass slightly compared to the seatpost, and makes it less likely to have an issue where the battery slips down and is a pain to retrieve. This does, however, impact the downtube storage space when the battery is fitted.

As for the storage, it's great. The magnetic clip proved incredibly secure over the roughest terrain. In terms of storage, I have been able to fit a tyre lever, tubeless plugs, TPU gravel tube, and if not for the Di2 battery, I reckon another tube could fit in there as well. It’s neat, it’s aero, and it works well.

The storage also highlights another positive. When getting the bike built up, the mechanic was very impressed by the frame's internal quality. No messy-looking joins at the headtube or around the internal storage. The tolerances around the headset and bottom bracket were all spot on, an area that can often be lacking even in some traditionally higher-end brands. It’s something to consider when doing a frame build, as full bikes from a bike shop only make it to the shop floor if the frame has passed muster.

The frankly stunning paint job has garnered awed looks from riders on the group ride and passers-by. Whereas Chinese brand bikes have traditionally been looked down on (even though many well-established European brand frames are made in Asia), this has been a bike that has attracted interest and turned heads. It looks the part, and for much of my testing, it has played the part, too.

I have loved riding this bike. The lateral stiffness is a limitation for a rider like me in some situations, namely big power attacks or sprints, but, quite frankly, I’m not at the pointy end of UCI races often enough to require these efforts regularly. I’ve still nabbed some Strava KOMs that require efforts of 600w+ for a minute, so although it feels less stiff, it still goes fast. Plus, based on Gralloch, chugging along at 300w average for a day on gravel, it works brilliantly. As a gravel bike that is fast at the speeds it needs to be, comfortable and capable across a broad mix of terrains, and practical for storage, this is superb. A new S-Works Crux 5 will be lighter, and maybe a bit more aero (it might not), but it won’t have adjustment at point of sale, and the frame costs £3,000 more. This entire build costs around that with high-end wheels and an electronic groupset.

I will also add that a previous concern around Chinese frames has been aftermarket customer care. This will likely still not be as straightforward as going to the local bike shop and dealing with the brand through them. However, European dealers are becoming more common for Chinese frames, so customer care should become easier, with spares more readily available without the high shipping costs.

There is a big shift in the industry now, with Chinese brands applying the same engineering skills that have created some of the best bike frames on the market to their 'own brand' frames. Some of these brands are now recruiting aerodynamicists and CFD specialists, testing with pro teams to gather rider input, and marketing aggressively in much the same way established Western brands do. As a result, frames like the Seka ExAero GR will become more commonplace, and at present, they are plenty good enough to compete with the big hitters. Granted, some refinements are still needed, but when you factor in the price, this is a highly competitive offering in the gravel-race market.

Value

At £2,205.19/ $3,299, the Seka ExAero GR is certainly not at the price point that many people would traditionally associate with a Chinese frame, with an additional $539 for the bars and $229 for the seatpost. The Seka features strong quality control, independent research to develop innovative solutions such as the WindEye, and a paint job that puts many established European or American brands to shame.

Other offerings in a similar vein include the Tavelo Grow. As a frameset, it’s a bit cheaper at £1,217/ $1,650 and features equally large clearances and internal storage. You can also get the Winspace G3 gravel frameset for £1,142/ $1,550. However, neither of these frames has quite the same finish quality as the Seka, and while I haven’t tested them, the WindEye has proven to be an impressively comfortable addition for a gravel bike that makes a big difference to performance.

Of course, there are also the high-end brand offerings that the Seka aims to dethrone. The Cannondale SuperX Lab71 (£4,950/ $4,999), Specialized S-Works Crux 5 (£5,249/ $5,799), Cervelo Aspero-5 (£5,000/ $5,500), and Argon18 Antimatter (£4,395/ $4,999) are all at least £2,000/ $2,500 more expensive for just the frameset, even with the seatpost included in those prices. They are also often limited to only the highest specification frame offerings as a frame-only build. If you do buy a complete build, you may need to change the bar width, stem length, seatpost setback, and crank length, so expect additional outlays.

I will say that compared to these bikes, the Seka is quite a close competitor. It is fast. I can’t give a wattage or savings figure, but it’s certainly not lacking compared to other aero-focused gravel race frames. The only area I feel it lacks is lateral stiffness, where even my Cannondale Topstone 3 wins out. But for gravel racing, this has not had a discernible impact on performance, while the quality of the frame, finish, and features are all genuinely up there with the best. Weight is another factor, as many of these £4k+ frames are around 100-150g lighter. But in practical terms, this makes a very small difference to performance, and likely not one worth £2,000/ $2,500 for most people.

It’s probably not the best value frame you can go for compared to lower-end offerings from the big brands, and customer care is still not as simple as going to the local bike shop. But for a high-end gravel race bike build, I’m genuinely astounded by how good this bike has been when compared to the high-end offerings from the big European and American brands.

Tech spec

• Price: £2,205.19/ $3,299
• Frame: Toray T1100 and M46J carbon fibre
• Fork: Toray T1100 and M46J carbon fibre
• Size: 49, 52, 54, 56, 58, 61cm
• Tyre clearance: 56/52mm front/rear
• Bottom bracket: T47 threaded
• Thru-axle: Front (12 x 100mm), Rear (12 x 142mm)
• Cable routing: Internal
• Weight: 980g (frameset, 54cm)

As part of their new Concept collection, the Concept Bib Shorts have been designed to provide maximum speed, making them Velocio’s ‘fastest bib short ever’, according to the brand. That’s all well and good, but I suspect most riders are looking for comfort as the primary quality from their bib shorts, although free speed is always welcome.

This is especially true of these shorts, which appear to be biased towards gravel riding according to the wording and imagery of much of the marketing, although I can’t see anything that marks them out as off-road shorts specifically; there are no thigh pockets, for example, which is typical of shorts that fall into the best gravel bike clothing. They do, however, follow Velocio’s usual subtle and muted aesthetic, as does the rest of the Concept range

Design details

With a stretch-woven, softshell-style fabric, the Concept shorts feel a little bit like Castelli’s pricey Premio Evo Bibshort. There is a slight rustle to the material, and it manages to feel both tough and light at the same time, which is a clever trick. As is the way with modern shorts, seams are kept to a minimum. Gone are the days when more panels meant a better fit. Velocio has even managed to get rid of the central seam under the pad, which is the first time I’ve seen this in a pair of shorts; it makes a lot of sense, so you aren’t sitting on a seam all the time, and it probably adds to their durability.

Despite the relatively few seams, the shorts are heavily shaped and three-dimensional for comfort in the riding position.

The laser-cut legs are finished with a couple of centimetres of silicone grippers, whilst the top of the shorts is bound with Lycra edging. Neither the front nor the back of the shorts comes up particularly high, sitting just about at belly button level on me.

The rear of the shorts is double-layered, with a kind of mesh drop liner for reasons that were not entirely clear to me. I guess it might help with moisture management or a touch of extra protection against mud or road spray?

There is a nice, substantial feel to the multi-density pad, with its tiered structure ramping up the padding under the sit bones and reducing it towards the edges. There is also a nice, soft section which extends up the front of the shorts. It is worth noting that the pad is not the same as that used in Velocio’s best-selling LUXE shorts; the Concept pad feels a bit more contoured and thicker.

The straps are wide but don’t look especially breathable, and just feature a small mesh panel between the shoulder blades to help keep them in the right place.

Visually, the matte material looks great and shows off the large, reflective ‘Velocio’ wording on both thighs.

The shorts come in five colours for men: Black Olive, Smoked Paprika, Deep Lichen, Black and the Plum Truffle as per the review pair. Sizing runs from XS to XXXXL for men and XXS to XXXL for women in the same colours.

Performance

As with the Concept jersey, there is a bit of an off-road bias in the wording and imagery used by Velocio, but nothing in the construction of the shorts themselves screams gravel. Thus, I used the shorts (and jersey) both on- and off-road with equal success.

Sizing was consistent with other Velocio shorts and tights, as well as with other brands like Castelli and Assos, so size Large was an ideal fit. The leg length was great, which, as a slightly lanky guy, is always nice. Strap length was also good, holding the shorts in place on the bike without putting any pressure on my shoulders when standing up, and the combination of a great cut and silicone grippers meant that the hems didn’t migrate upwards whilst riding, which is a pet hate of mine.

My local gravel riding has plenty of interesting singletrack, which is great, but at the time of my testing, spring growth had left some trails a bit overgrown, which in turn led to scratched legs and snagged shorts. However, the tough fabric of the Concept shorts shrugged off any malicious vegetation without a problem.

Back on the tarmac, albeit the very warm and pleasant Mallorcan variety, the shorts proved themselves comfortable and cool. I can’t objectively quantify the degree of compression they provide or the extent to which that aids performance, but subjectively, there was a really nice, supportive feel to the shorts, which some lightweight materials can struggle to provide.

With plenty of long rides under my belt in these shorts, I can confidently say that the pad worked fantastically well for me, with comfort aplenty even after 160 km+. The firm-ish foam held up well without compressing over the course of the ride, and the tapered edges also helped with comfort. Perhaps the only negative is that it is quite a wide, bulky pad and some riders might find it a bit intrusive, but it certainly didn’t bother me.

Value

I’ve used a few bits and pieces from Velocio recently, and they have rapidly become one of my favourite brands. The consistency in fit and material quality stands out to me, and the Concept bib shorts are no exception.

They are comfortable, durable, and feel great on, but there is a catch: inevitably, these days, the ticket price. At £258/ $349, it's a considerable chunk of cash for a pair of shorts, but (and bear with me here), at least the Concept shorts do offer something different in return for your cash - whether it is worth it is up to you. The fit and feel are top-notch, but more importantly, the fabric, pad and pattern are all an upgrade on Velocio’s other shorts. The lack of under-pad seam is neat and possibly unique, whilst the plush pad worked perfectly for me.

However, this all has to be caveated by the fact that I found the Assos Mille GT Shorts very comfortable too, for example, and they are half the price of these.

If you are struggling to find some comfy shorts, or value innovation, exclusivity, and versatility for road or gravel, then try the Concept bib shorts. If not, then there are plenty of less expensive shorts that should do the job, and for this reason alone I think they can’t quite be a 5-star product.

Tech specs

• Price: £258/ $349
• Weight: N/A
• Chamois style: Race (multi-density)
• Storage: None
• Leg type: Shorts
• Colours: Five (Black Olive, Plum Truffle, Smoked Paprika, Deep Lichen, Black)
• Sizes: XS, S, M, L, XL, XXL, XXXL, XXXXL

In support of the Decathlon CMA CGM WorldTour team, Van Rysel (which is owned by Decathlon) offers the RCR line of products, which are designed to combine performance and value.

The RCR Road shoes aim to compete with products more than double their price, and, on paper at least, they look pretty good. Of course, where shoes are concerned, the best spec sheet in the world is worthless if the fit is poor.

Design details

The RCRs are white, very white in fact, with just the silver Van Rysel branding alleviating the monochrome upper.

Even the rear of the sole is white, with a moulded rubber heel piece for off-bike grip. There is a black rubber toe piece at the front of the sole too, although neither is replaceable. The rest of the outsole is made from carbon, and receives the full 12/12 marks from VR for stiffness, although as this scale is entirely of their own making, it is a fairly meaningless metric.

There are two large mesh vents on the sole to aid cooling and airflow, while the three-bolt cleat slots are reasonably generous in length. The sole is marked with graduations to help with cleat positioning and replacement.

Those ventilation holes align with perforations in the mint-green insole, so all the fresh air reaches your toes, keeping them cool and fresh. The insole doesn’t come with different-sized arch supports as some brands provide, but it feels a level above the basic insoles that some cycling shoes use as standard.

The perforated theme continues on the upper, with tiny holes across pretty much the whole shoe. This is great in a heat wave, less so for frosty spring starts. The synthetic upper material is seam-free, giving the shoes a clean, minimalist look.

Although they are branded ‘habu’, the two Boa-style dials are in fact made by Boa and work very similarly: twist one way for incremental tightening, the other way for incremental loosening and pull out to disengage entirely. The dials are rubberised for a good grip. Van Rysel has used fabric ‘pulleys’ for the straps, to better spread the load, apparently, and the tongue is captive down one side so it always sits centrally. The top of the tongue is well-padded, as is the heel cup, both of which aid retention and comfort.

My pair in size EU44 weighed 612g (156g per shoe), which certainly isn't the lightest shoe around but is in the ballpark for similarly priced products.

As well as the Ultra White colourway, there is an Ultra White / Pink (Roubaix special) and Smoked Black. Sizes run from EU36 to 47 in full sizes, with half sizes available between EU42 and 46.

Performance

It's a rare and beautiful thing to instantly click with a product, and even more so when it is a pair of performance road shoes which you might reasonably expect to have to break in for a few rides. However, before I’d even reached the end of my street on the first ride, I knew that the RCRs and I were going to get along marvelously.

A thousand kilometres later, and I still love them.

I suppose I should try and be a little more objective and informative, but, spoiler alert, I am already positive that these will make it into my annual ‘Gear of the Year’ list.

The sole’s stiffness was noticeable when pedalling, especially out of the saddle, and provided nice power transfer and a good, stable platform. I am not a WorldTour sprinter, and I am unlikely to hit four-figure wattages, but I have used softer shoes and don’t particularly like the feel; the RCRs are certainly stiff enough for most riders and are used by some of the sponsored pros, too.

Recently I’ve ridden in Sidi Ergo 6s, Quoc Mono IIs and even some older S-Works, and I think that the RCRs stand up to all of them in terms of stiffness.

That stiffness is all the more impressive given the large ventilation holes in the soles, and there is no doubt that the ventilation works very well. I’ve never struggled with my feet overheating, but on some long, 34°C rides in Mallorca the airy feeling was very pleasant. Earlier in the year, in the UK, it was a bit less welcome, but was easily fixed with a bit of pre-ride gaffer tape over the hole.

Of course, where footwear is concerned, fit is virtually the be-all and end-all, and luckily, the RCRs were the perfect match to my foot shape, which is low volume and maybe a little bit narrower than average. As a result, the slim shape of the Van Rysel shoes couldn’t have been better for me.

The double habu/Boa dials allowed tension over the instep and forefoot without too much tightness at the ankle, and the micro-adjustment allowed easy fine-tuning throughout the day as my feet swelled in the heat.

The deep, padded heel cup and plush tongue held my foot securely, with no slippage or pressure points, and the overall feel was an unusual combination of comfort and performance.

I guess I ought to pick out a few negatives, although they are few and far between. At 612g, they are maybe a little portly for a range-topping pro shoe (though not for their price peers), and the white upper requires some care to keep it looking its best. I also imagine that wide-footed riders might not find them as comfortable as I did, but that’s just how it is with shoes. Some potential buyers might wish for replaceable heel and toe bumpers, but given that I have recently lost two of my Quoc heel pieces during rides, maybe them being permanently attached is better (Shimano’s £350 S-Phyres also lack replaceable sole pieces). And lastly, some foot shapes would benefit from a more customisable insole with arch support options, but the price of the RCRs leaves plenty of cash for a change of insoles.

Value

At £180/ $279, these shoes are a bargain. For roughly half the price of the S-Works Torch, Sidi Shot 3 or Shimano S-Phyre RC9, the Van Rysel RCRs gave me all the performance I could want, coupled with comfort enough for eight-hour rides in hot temperatures.

Even as a bit of a weight weenie, I’d happily pay the 50-100g weight penalty that these have over some of the lightest shoes available for the comfort they provide, and that’s without considering the £150+ cost saving.

On my feet at least, the Van Rysel RCR are a near-perfect fit, look great and perform well, so it's an easy 5 stars for them.

Tech spec

• Price: £180/ $279/ €170
• Weight: 156g per shoe (actual, size EU44)
• Outsole: Carbon fibre
• Retention: Twin Boa (habu) Li2
• Colours: 3
• Sizes: EU36-47 (including limited half sizes)

The gravel sector has exploded with bike options and, while choice can be a good thing, it's created a tricky landscape to navigate – particularly for the new buyer just entering the discipline. One-model gravel lineups are no longer commonplace, with manufacturers now creating distinct lineups with individual bikes aimed at various gravel offshoots. This means you'll see road bike-style options with bigger tyre clearances, inbetweeners that balance pseudo-suspension with weight and speed, and models that closely resemble mountain bikes of yesteryear.

It's confusing to say the least, but the gravel cycling discipline and terrain are so diverse depending on where you live, ride and race; sometimes you need a specific tool for the job at hand – a scissor can prune a tree, but a pair of secateurs will do a better job in less time.

This leads me to Factor’s current gravel bike lineup. It currently spans three distinct models – the Aluto, Ostro Gravel and Sarana pictured here, each of which has a specific use case and function. While the former two are designed with all-round ability and pure speed in mind, the Sarana pushes the gravel concept to the extreme, catering to ultra events and bikepacking, where riders spend days in the saddle, often self-supported in remote areas that require a capable and reliable machine.

To complicate things even further, we also recently spotted a new Factor gravel prototype at Unbound, which appears to adopt a similar wide-set fork as the Factor One aero road bike, and looks designed as an out-and-out racer. This could take Factor's gravel offering up to four models, with two extremes bookending a brace of all-rounders.

The birth of the Sarana was no accident but rather the result of the Factor design and engineering team’s effort to create a brand-new machine, unsullied by current gravel bike trends and capable of supporting Canadian endurance athlete Rob Britton. The project started nearly three years ago and was heavily inspired by real-world feedback from Britton – focusing on speed, comfort, and control – important attributes for when races push past the 20-hour barrier.

While the average customer will never push the Sarana to these extremes, it’s still pretty adept on shorter excursions, too, and does an amazing job of smoothing out rutted terrain, washboard gravel, and mountain trails.

Design details

The Sarana is an intriguing-looking bike – quintessentially Factor, with a blueprint that sticks to the classical form-over-function design philosophy. The aesthetics are divisive though, and you'll either love it or hate it. There are two colour palettes available, the cyan blue pictured here and prismatic gold – both are muted but draw on the natural tones of the outdoors and the various hues experienced when riding from dusk till dawn. The graphic design is bold, with the Factor and Sarana wordmarks positioned prominently on the downtube and seat tube.

The Sarana is manufactured from Toray and Nippon Graphite pan-based fibres, tuned to balance stiffness with comfort and vibration-damping – similar ingredients to the Factor Aluto. The frame architecture comprises three distinct yet seamlessly integrated areas: the front, middle and rear, which represent a departure from how the company developed the Aluto and Ostro Gravel platforms. Like many modern gravel platforms, it’s compatible only with 1x groupsets and comes with a handy 30.9mm external seatpost clamp to accommodate a range of dropper posts.

It draws inspiration from the Monzo road bike, featuring a truncated aero profile and subtle hourglass sculpting on the headtube. It also comes stock with a collection of purpose-built 'aero' bike bags that fit within the triangle and above the top tube to help extend the leading edge of the tube shapes and the sailing effect at certain yaw angles.

The backbone of the Sarana is the down tube area, which has been purposely oversized to add torsional stiffness and hollowed out for optimal internal storage capacity. Factors claims that the downtube sculpting promotes cleaner airflow over the frame and that the centre of gravity is low and balanced when laden with tools.

The rear end is all about terrain management, and tyre clearance is at the forefront. While not the market leader in this instance, the Sarana can accommodate tyres as wide as 57mm (2.2-inch). Our test bike came with Black Inc 46 carbon wheels wrapped in 2.0-inch Continental RaceKing mountain bike tyres.

To accommodate rubber this wide, the Sarana features dropped seat stays and an offset seat tube, which double up as a natural leaf-spring system that flexes while maintaining lateral progress. Clever directional layup techniques have been implemented at the bottom bracket junction to manage fatigue and traction, resulting in an 18 per cent reduction in vibration.

Specifications

Our Sarana test bike came outfitted with SRAM Force XPLR AXS, featuring a 44T up front (the frame does have provision for up to a 52T chainring) and a 10-46T rear cassette. There's nothing wrong with Force – I rate it on par with Red AXS when it comes to performance and aesthetics; it's just heavier.

To ensure better stopping performance when fully rigged, the native 160mm front/rear brake rotor configuration can be flipped if you prefer the added security of larger 180mm disc rotors. The platform was optimised for SRAM but is also able to run various Shimano Di2 groupsets (wired versions, too) - there’s a Di2 exit port above the UDH triangle.

Five frame sizes are available, spanning 49, 52, 54, 56 and 58cm – one less than the Ostro Gravel and Aluto models. The Sarana’s geometry numbers are racier than you’d expect from an endurance-themed machine with a 71.5-degree head angle and 65mm trail figure (identical across all sizes) and a 74- 75.3-degree seat tube angle. The reach (398mm) and stack (573mm) on a size medium are very close to the Ostro Gravel and border on aggressive.

The 425mm chainstays and offset seatpost have made room for up to 57mm tyres, while the 80mm bottom bracket drop sits slightly lower than its rivals and stablemates. While not outrageous, tyre clearance falls between the recently released Specialized Crux (55mm) and Open Wi.De 2.0 (66mm).

Factor also suspension-corrected the geometry to ensure parity when specced with a 30mm RockShox Rudy XPLR fork with sag, evidenced by the 427mm axle-to-crown measurement.

Performance

The Factor Sarana is not your typical racing gravel bike, but it can take you places and traverse terrain many of its rivals can’t. While there are many faster and lighter options on the market, "faster" is contextual, and when the terrain gets rocky or washboard gravel comes into the equation, there aren't many bikes able to match the Sarana for speed and comfort. And it’s in these technical and rough settings that the Sarana should be experienced and ridden in anger, not on champagne gravel and definitely not on tarmac.

A gravel bike as capable as the Sarana also questions the need for a mountain bike – especially where I live in the Surrey Hills – thanks to the front suspension and fairly relaxed head angle. It copes just fine with everything that has come its way – and I’m talking fire roads, twisty singletrack and step-downs. It feels controlled and completely adept when things get gnarly. Don’t get me wrong, a cross-country mountain bike will be faster down rough, negative gradients, but then again, a bike of this nature won't keep up with the Sarana on 80 per cent of the gravel routes in the South East of England.

One bugbear is the narrow clearance around the fork crown and tyre. The back of the crown tends to collect dry leaves and debris, and this rubs against the tyre. I’d like to see how the Sarana deals with mud come wintertime, and whether the crown/tyre clogs up or not – this is a known issue with the RockShox Rudy fork. You can substitute it for a rigid fork, which does nothing to adversely affect the head angle and trail number – the bike was designed to work seamlessly with both options.

At 9.75kg with RockShox Rudy XPLR fitted, the bike isn't the best at climbing, but it holds momentum well and conforms to the terrain, nullifying most vibration-induced speed loss associated with off-road riding. I haven't felt held back by the 2.0-inch Continental RaceKing mountain bike rubber. If anything, the grip offsets any weight or rolling resistance penalties. After all, there’s more time to be lost on the downhills than on the climbs, and this width affords the rider confidence to push harder and not overthink the situation.

Our test bike came fitted with a 44T single chainring, which perhaps holds it back from unlocking an even greater top end, but it’s not often my gravel routes touch speeds of over 50km/h. During my initial testing, I mulled over the idea of trying a 52T ring, but given the final drive ratio of 4.40, the 44T was all I needed, and I never felt my cadence getting too high. The 10-46T cassette provides ample gearing for most vertical excursions. It only really becomes hard work on double-digit gradients with loose surfaces.

It’s no slouch on the tarmac, but it wasn't designed for it and riding it in this setting would be doing the bike a disservice – you’ll get the most enjoyment for your mile off the beaten track.

Value

The gravel bike sector is a tricky space to navigate at present, with bike technology evolving apace – and offshoots focusing on aero gravel, all-round riding and adventure, take your pick. While there’s a lot going on, the upshot is a variety of bike choices, which wasn’t the case just five years ago. At that juncture, Factor had more variety than its rivals with the Vista and LS platforms, and the company has continued this stance with its three (maybe four if the prototype bike we saw at Unbound goes into production) bike approach to gravel.

For many, the Factor Sarana will represent a solid choice – even at £8,299/ $8,499/ €10,199 (7,699/ $7,899 /€9,499, if you spec it sans suspension fork). Owing to its breadth of attributes, I foresee a convergence of curious road riders and mountain bikers. It’s neither road-bike racy nor mountain-bike burly; instead, it blends both disciplines, and the result is one of the most enjoyable drop-bar dirt bikes I've ridden this year.

I didn't want to like the Sarana, but I find myself appreciative of the concept, and the variety of riding it affords me; from road and hardpack gravel to semi-technical mountain bike trails – particularly if it's specced with the suspension fork. I never once felt uncomfortable; if anything, it made sense on the trails I ride from the moment I pressed the pedals for the first time. For the kind of off-road riding found across most of the UK, the Sarana is totally up for the task. It’s accommodating when it comes to storage and luggage capacity, compliant on the rough stuff, nimble enough to satisfy speed merchants, and capable when things get truly challenging.

It’s not as fast as a bona fide gravel racing machine, but that’s not what the Sarana claims to be. If you’re after one bike capable of dismissing all conditions and challenges and going to remote areas far off the beaten track, the Factor Sarana might be the answer.

Tech spec

• Price: £8,299/ $8,499 /€10,199 
• Brand: Factor
• Frame: Factor Sarana (Toray, Nippon Graphite, Pan-Based Fibre)
• Fork: 30mm RockShox Rudy XPLR
  Weight: 7.75kg (actual, 54cm)
• Sizes: 49, 52, 54, 56, 58cm
• Levers: SRAM Force AXS
• Brakes: SRAM Force AXS
• Rear derailleur: SRAM Force XPLR AXS
• Front derailleur: N/A
• Crankset: SRAM Force XPLR Dub Wide, 44T
• Bottom bracket: SRAM Dub Wide press fit
• Cassette: SRAM Force XPLR 10-46T
• Chain: SRAM Force
• Wheels: Black Inc 46
• Tyres: 2.0-inch Continental RaceKing
• Bar/stem: Black Inc Integrated 
• Seatpost: FSA SL-K SB0 (compatible with dropepr post)
• Saddle: Selle Italia SLR

Originally launched in 2013, Rapha has overhauled its Brevet collection, claiming it is ‘designed to meet the demands of ultra racing, validated by TCR champions Victor Bosoni and Jana Kesenheimer, offering a performance edge for self-supported adventures.’

I’m guessing it was designed to do that before, but with feedback, things can improve. When it comes to the Women's Merino Jersey, there was never formally a Version II to follow on from the original design, rather a series of rolling fabric and fit refinements over the years.

For Version III, Rapha says it has revised the fit, fabrics and features to further optimise comfort, functionality and performance for endurance riding, but how does it stack up against the best cycling jerseys?

Design details

The jersey is made from Rapha Performance Merino (RPM), a blend of 64% recycled cationic polyester and 36% merino wool. Rapha says the antimicrobial fabric is designed to offer natural temperature regulation, while drying quickly and resisting odours over consecutive days in the saddle. It's also intended to be durable enough to cope with the demands of endurance riding, including the occasional mid-tour hand wash.

The distinctive signature Brevet stripes remain, though they've been updated with a 'new perforated design' that the brand says delivers a noticeable reduction in weight.

The biggest update comes at the rear, where Rapha has introduced its new "Brevet Air Pocket." Rather than stitching the pockets directly onto the jersey, the multi-pocket arrangement sits on a separate panel (attached laterally and with reinforced tabs at stress pinch points).

According to Rapha, this allows the loaded pockets to stand away from the body, improving airflow and helping to reduce heat and moisture build-up across the lower back. A mesh panel beneath the Air Pocket is also intended to boost ventilation.

A silicone dot print around the hem keeps the jersey securely in place without adding unnecessary bulk.

The jersey is available in sizes XXS to XL and currently comes in two colourways: Black/Black (a black jersey with black background stripes) and Dark Forest/Silver.

Performance

I've been testing a size medium, as recommended by Rapha's sizing guide. As the guide is based solely on chest, waist, and hip measurements, perhaps I shouldn't have been surprised that the fit is perfect around the torso but comes up too short in the body for my liking. With a longer-than-average torso, the jersey rides up above the waistband of my bib shorts (at the front) when I'm off the bike - not a great look. Once in the riding position, however, it feels fine, despite still looking a little short.

In hindsight, sizing up may have been the better option (even if it had led to bagginess in the torso). It could also have eased the fit around the arms…

The sleeve seams have very little stretch, creating something of a muffin-top effect on my upper arms. Riders with slimmer arms are unlikely to notice, but if yours are on the broader side, it's worth bearing in mind. I never found it uncomfortable, although it did leave noticeable marks on my arms after longer rides. Sizing up might be recommended, but there could be a trade-off with the fit elsewhere.

Rapha recommends the jersey for temperatures between 14-24°C (57-75°F) and my experience broadly backs that up. It provided sufficient insulation on cooler mornings, even without a base layer, yet remained comfortable as the temperature climbed. While riding at a moderate tempo (that can be sustained for long consecutive days in the saddle), I never felt like I was overheating - the RPM fabric is impressive in changing conditions. I also used it in temperatures exceeding the recommended range and was impressed by the wicking and fast-drying fabric when the sun induced sweating.

The jersey genuinely doesn’t need to hit the laundry after every wear. The merino blend does an excellent job of resisting odours, making it well suited to multi-day rides, or simply stretching the time between washes. The darker colourway also does a good job of disguising grime - otherwise a real giveaway to living like a vagrant while on multi-day adventures - although that's something of a trade-off when it comes to daytime visibility.

After dark, however, it's a different story. The signature Brevet stripes are highly effective between sunset and sunrise, creating bright reflective bands that do a great job of catching headlights and making you more visible than your bike lights alone.

For me, the shorter body length means the pockets sit slightly higher on the back than I would ideally like. That said, the Brevet Air Pocket is a clever piece of design, and it wasn't made overly difficult to access despite the shorter-than-average jersey. It isn't a wholly new concept - I remember a similar approach being used on the 7mesh Skyline Jersey several years ago, although that design didn't include the mesh panel through the main body of the jersey.

I’ve found this detail makes a noticeable difference when it comes to managing moisture build-up. I’m a sweaty rider and the mesh panel really helped keep things under control.

The pocket system is at its most effective when the zipped-through pocket is properly loaded. Rapha describes this as two pockets thanks to the dual-access design. In use, it feels more like one single storage area. Simply filling the three standard pockets with ‘normal ride essentials’ (think phone, mini pump and snack bars) doesn't create enough bulk to make the Air Pocket work as intended.

I found a rain jacket or extra layers to be optimal; they aren’t too heavy but add bulk to lift the entire setup. I found packing this pocket best done before putting the jersey on; that said, it’s not impossible to do while wearing the jersey. The feature is aimed squarely at riders heading beyond the beaten track; when you're carrying extra layers, tools and food for a longer adventure, the additional storage becomes genuinely useful rather than just a marketing feature.

Value

This is a specialist garment for those partaking in endurance events and adventures and, as such, it comes at a high price. Rapha has created a unique, hard-to-come-by combination of merino-based materials, integrated reflective detailing, and extra storage that may justify the £195/ $260/ €230 cost for some.

Possible alternatives don’t offer the reflective detailing; some compromise on storage too. If reflective detailing isn't a priority, PEdALED’s Odyssey Merino Jersey is a more affordable alternative at £155/ $185. There are bound to be fit compromises with the £150/ $200 Adventure Tech offering from Q36.5; this is only available for men.

In short, if you want the unique offerings of Rapha's Brevet Merino Jersey, you will have to pay for them, and there may be some compromises where fit is concerned. Performance and functionality won’t be disappointing, though.

Tech spec

• Price: £195/ $260/ €230
• Pockets: Five
• Fit: Endurance
• Type: Short sleeve
• Colours: Black/Black, Dark Forest/Silver
• Sizes: XXS, XS, S, M, L, XL, XXL

Wolf Tooth sparked an influx of race-specific gravel bike pedals when it launched the DEL pedals in 2025. Featuring a single-sided entry, rather than the traditional two-sided design seen on Shimano SPD pedals, it aimed to lower stack height and increase pedal surface area for a gravel-race-specific pedal.

Our tech editor used the regular Wolf Tooth DEL pedals at Gravel Burn in South Africa last year and was impressed by their performance, durability, and lightweight efficiency over seven days of demanding gravel racing.

With the Mk0 version, things have ramped up considerably in the performance stakes.

Design details

The Wolf Tooth Mk0 DEL pedals are very similar to the standard DEL pedals. A wider platform design means that with the tread of most gravel shoes or a pontoon system on the Shimano RX910, the pedals have a contact surface area of 559mm². Shimano XTR 9200, for example, sits at 144mm². More contact is only part of the equation; the other is the total area this contact patch covers, and the wide platform of the DEL pedals means there is minimal float when clipped in.

Wolf Tooth has also designed this pedal to be resilient. A five-year warranty is included, while every component of the pedal can be replaced, should you damage it. There are also user service tutorials to ensure maintenance is easy and that the life of the pedal is prolonged.

Other notable attributes include the “igus bushing with a custom radial seal that protects internal components from debris”, effectively limiting the chance that dirt will get into the axles and reduce bearing performance.

Although functionally the same as the regular DEL pedals, a lot of work has gone into reducing the weight to 174g (172g on my scales) for the pair. DLC-coated Ti axles, PVD-coated Ti hardware, and aggressive machining have saved 43g compared to the standard DEL pedals. Just the one colour is available, rather than the coloured variety Wolf Tooth usually offers. The 6061 aluminium pedal bodies are machined in-house by Wolf Tooth, and do give a premium feel.

Wolf Tooth has also carried over the adjustable Q-factor of these pedals. There are 51, 55, and 59mm options available, and the swapping process is fairly straightforward; you unscrew the spindle, then adjust the three inner bearings and two spacers to set your width.

At just 14.5mm, the pedal is also very thin, which aids ground clearance through corners, while the open design helps shed mud. Stack height is also just 14.7mm, making it comparable to most road-race pedal systems and lower than pretty much any other gravel-specific pedal system available.

The SPD-style cleats are included, along with shims so that shoes with taller tread can still be used; however, the shims do not grip the shoe soles perfectly and can twist and move out of position when unclipping. The cleats have five degrees of float, and retention is adjustable via a hex screw.

The pedals are rated at a max rider weight of 90kg owing to the lightweight hardware used in the construction.

Performance

The Wolf Tooth Mk0 DEL pedals are, in terms of shape and functionality, identical to the standard DEL pedals, so the single-sided entry remains.

First and foremost, fitting the pedals is very easy. As with all pedals, you need to grease the thread, even more so when it comes to titanium, to avoid any binding. (It is recommended not to use these with titanium cranks). Clipping in using the supplied SPD-compatible stainless steel cleats, or standard Shimano ones, is effortless. There is no need to catch the pedal lip as such - instead it’s an easy stamp-in job.

There is some concern that removing the second side of the pedal makes clipping in more difficult, but fortunately the pedal remains in place and doesn't spin too freely on its axles. Additionally, riding on proper gravel trails rather than single track or more technical terrain, there is virtually no situation where I ever unclip, so the potential time lost from the single-sided element is negated in other ways.

The improved ground clearance is a great feature. Riding in ruts or even over large stony terrain, having a bit more clearance for the pedal to avoid strikes is handy. It also means you can pedal through corners a bit more easily, which is useful for maintaining traction over loose terrain.

That huge contact patch of the pedals is also exceptionally good for pedalling performance. On standard Shimano pedals, I have felt that my foot moves around somewhat when putting the power down. On the DEL pedals, there is no such issue. I have found these comparable to the stability of road pedals and exceptional for power transfer.

I used them together with Nimbl Urano shoes, which worked a treat as the tread sits nicely on the pedals while the cleat is engaged. However, using the Northwave Extreme X shoes, the tread was higher, so I needed the plastic shims under the cleat. The problem here is that the plate has less bite against the sole of the shoe than just the cleat, so when unclipping from the pedals I found the cleat often twisted. This meant I needed to loosen the retention a fair bit for these shoes or plane the tread off.

I’ve not actually needed to adjust the Q factor, but it is very easy to carry out. Simply unscrew the spindle and adjust the spacers and bearings. This carries over to all the individual parts of the pedal should they get damaged and require replacement. Given the price of the pedals, it is great that each individual part can be purchased and replaced rather than requiring an entirely new set of pedals.

Weight is a big area where these pedals are impressive. At just 172g for the pair, and the cleats adding only a small amount of weight, these are lighter than a few road systems. It’s not noticeable when riding, admittedly, but for those cutting weight everywhere on the bike, there is scope to reduce a large amount of rotational mass. I also have to say that these pedals are an absolute work of art in terms of aesthetics. The machined aluminium is just brilliant, and the single colour choice is also not a bad thing, given the DEL pedals tend to lose some color after exposure to the elements and from shoe scuffs. In this gunmetal colour, wear and tear is far less noticeable.

My only real gripe with these pedals is that most of the performance and functionality of the Mk0 DEL is identical to the standard DEL, save for the lighter weight.

Value

Unfortunately, the Mk0 DEL pedals don't represent great value at £310/ $365. In terms of performance and functionality, there is virtually nothing separating the Mk0 pedals from the standard DEL offering, which is also fairly expensive at £189/ $220. I have been using the Shimano M520 pedals for years, and they do the job well enough at £49.99.

The Wolf Tooth MK0 are a classic case of diminishing returns on investment, but the fact is there is a return. This is the lightest, highest-contact gravel pedal on the market, and for those looking at cutting every gram possible, there isn't a pedal that comes close.

The replacement parts, warranty, and serviceability all improve the value of these pedals, as you are unlikely to ever require a replacement set. But the same is true of the standard DEL pedals, which offer better value at a slightly higher weight.

If you want the best gravel options on the market, you can't go wrong with the standard DEL pedals, but if you're looking to unlock marginal performance gains and have the money to burn, the MK0 makes a convincing case.

Tech spec

• Price: £310/ $365
• Weight: 172g (pair, actual)
• Q-factor: 51 mm/ 55 mm/ 59 mm (user adjustable)
• Body: CNC-machined 6061-T6 aluminum
• Spindle: Titanium with DLC coating
• Bearings: Low-friction cartridge bearings x3
• Float and release: 5 degrees/ 12 degrees
• Cleat Compatibility: SPD

Scribe has been making headlines for its wind-tunnel test data, with lofty claims about its Tempus Disc/100 wheelset. And while the Tempus wheels are genuinely rapid - we tested them in a few 10- and 25-mile time trials and came away mighty impressed - the Northern Ireland-based company reckons the new Elan Ultra 6s are among the fastest UCI-compliant wheelsets on the market.

The company has worked tirelessly over the past few years to win over new customers and reverse brand cachet opinions often associated with start-up brands. Having personally tested nearly every Scribe offering since 2019, I’ve always been impressed by the quality, service and support, and the way the team checks in and asks how my testing and racing are going – it’s the personal touch that goes a long way in securing lifelong customers.

Without access to a wind tunnel, my testing comprised real-world, anecdotal experiences in all manner of situations, including road bike time trials, chain gangs and general riding around Hampshire, Surrey and West Sussex. Again, Scribe has created a near-perfect, quality product that can be used throughout the year, not just for racing.

Technical details

Scribe's range comprises three distinct wheel lines: Ultra, Performance and Gravel/Off-road. As the name suggests, the wheels pictured here form part of the Ultra line and feature the same stealthy, black-on-black graphics as the Tempus wheels. The Scribe and Ultra wordmark logos are matte in execution and contrast the glossy, unidirectional carbon-fibre aesthetic quite superbly – the wheels look very refined and on par with the incumbents that comprise the best road bike wheels segment. This look and feel should find favour with users across the road riding spectrum, as the neutral aesthetics will complement most bike colourways. That said, I would have appreciated an ‘Elan’ logo somewhere on the wheel to help with uniformity and model consistency.

The wheels are manufactured from high-modulus T1000/T1100 carbon fibre claimed to balance strength and stiffness with low weight. The hubs feature ceramic bearings and come with Alpina-sourced wavy spokes laced in a 20/20 front/rear pattern. Scribe calls these wavy spokes OSL8, owing to the 5.7mm width that oscillates left to right – they look good and are claimed to enhance aerodynamics and compliance while remaining stiff and responsive.

Scribe carried out its independent wind tunnel testing at the Silverstone Sports Engineering Hub, and the publicly available results suggest these are the fastest bladed spokes compared to a flat 5mm bladed carbon equivalent. We won’t go into any of the numbers (they’re not insignificant but are less than one watt across 0-15-degree yaw angles) as we’re not able to quantify the claims, but the company is going to great lengths to collect data and test its products in the tunnel, which is appreciated.

Scribe has designed the Elan Ultra range with contemporary 24mm (internal) and 30mm (external) hooked rim profiles, built to play nicely with 28-30mm widths in terms of tyre support.

Performance

I’ve been testing the Elan Ultra 6 wheels for a few months now, taking in the latter end of winter and through autumn and summer, putting them through some wet, windy and cold rides. While it’s not possible to quantify the aerodynamic claims without the use of a wind tunnel, the all-round performance boost they add to the riding experience is tangible and hard to refute.

The wheels are designed around a 65mm-deep profile, with a 24mm internal (32mm external) rim width and a hooked bead optimised for 28mm tyres (the wheels can play nicely with widths of 28-35mm). All this makes for an impressively low system weight of 1,289g for the pair. I weighed the pair at 1,294g, which is impressively close to the claimed weight of 1,289g.

For this test, I requested a Shimano HG freewheel body to ensure compatibility wth my Shimano Dura-Ace Di2-equipped Cannondale SystemSix. After just a few kilometres you can feel the responsive nature of the wheels. They are incredibly light for their depth and dropped the system weight of my bike by 321g – a significant saving over the Shimano Dura-Ace C60 wheels I normally use. Straight-line performance on the flats is impressive, with the bike getting up to speed fairly quickly thanks to the low rotational inertia and stiffness, which subsequently translates well to the climbs.

While the new spokes look great, I can’t quantify whether they have indeed improved aerodynamics. What they have done, however, is make for a very stiff wheelset, which gets even firmer if you match them with harder tyre pressures. It’s not a dealbreaker, though – if anything, it helps with communication and feel. Handling is very predictable for a wheelset of this depth, even in challenging crosswinds, which adds to the all-round appeal.

Scribe's signature double-disc ratchet drive hub system might make for near-instant engagement, but it is also very loud. While I quite like the buzzing freehub - it's akin to a swarm of angry wasps ricocheting around in a tin can - it can be off-putting for some. That said, the noise can be softened by adding extra grease in the ratchet ring and engagement mechanism.

While they feel fast (on the flats, climbs and descents) and are stable in windy conditions, the Scribe Elan Ultra 6 wheels are not perfect – particularly when it comes to ride quality. While this can be attributed to the thicker carbon spokes, the firmness can be softened to a certain extent by running lower pressures or even fitting wider tyres.

Value

There’s no such thing as a bad product anymore, and it's becoming hard to fault products as a result. One thing that isn't improving, though, is pricing, and the onslaught of Chinese components is forcing the hand of the consumer – more so for frames and bikes at the moment, but wheels are coming to the fore, too. One thing Scribe has going for it as a brand is that its wheelsets are designed and hand-built at its operations centre in Belfast, Northern Ireland. That also means great aftersales support and quick, easy shipping for UK and European customers.

The Elan Ultra 6 wheels are a superb performance offering for the racer. They are super-lightweight, well-behaved in windy conditions, and feel as fast as the segment’s best options. While aerodynamics is always going to be hard to quantify on feel alone, they do feel quick and have elevated the performance of my bike overall. Perhaps that’s partly down to the 1,294g weight, which has boosted rolling inertia and climbing efficiency, but Scribe’s testing does also claim the Elan Ultra 6s are among the fastest UCI-legal wheels on the market.

Rival-wise, the Elan Ultra 6s go head-to-head against the Roval Rapide CLX III and Enve SES 6.7, both of which are premium options. The Rapides are mixed-depth in execution and configured 63/58mm front-to-rear; they also employ carbon spokes and ceramic bearings but have a narrower internal width, weigh more, and come up steeper at £2,998/ $3,500/ €3,499.

The Enve SES 6.7 has a 60/67mm front-to-rear split, which translates to a broader, more blunted rim on the front and a deeper, sharper rim at the rear. They’re arguably more refined in look and feel but lose out to the Elan Ultra 6’s 24mm internal width, not to mention costing upwards of £3,750 based on the specified hubset.

At £1,999/ $2,599/ €2,299, the Scribe Elan Ultra 6 wheelset is still a significant outlay for a brand that lacks the history and WorldTour success of Roval and Enve, but based on the three months of testing and what I've put them through, I remain impressed by the quality and performance and highly recommend them.

Tech specs

• Price: £1,999/ $2,599/ €2,299
• Weight: 1,294g (actual)
• Hubset: Scribe Ultra, ceramic bearings
• Freehub options: Shimano HG11/12, SRAM XDR, Campagnolo
• Rim depth: 65mm front/rear
• Rim width: 24mm internal, 32mm external
• Spoke count: 20/20 front/rear
• Rim: Hooked

There was a time when I would have given my right arm for a pair of the coolest sunglasses on the market. As a child who got into cycling thanks to Greg Lemond's 1989 Tour win, those cool glasses were Oakley. How could any teenager who fell in love with cycling through that year's Tour de France not lust after a pair of sunglasses worn by their cycling hero?

Over 30 years later, and the thought of shelling out hundreds of pounds on a pair of the best cycling sunglasses makes me shudder. Instead of chasing the coolest kit worn by big-name riders, I'm far more focused on a bargain and happy to wear sunglasses that cost a fraction of the price.

In fact, I'd take pride in paying for, and wearing, a set of wrap-around shades that do everything I need them to do and cost me less than £50.

Technical details

The BBB Cycling Chester Flux glasses come in under £50 (prices vary online) and come in a protective zipped case with a cleaning bag. The frame is made of Rilsan, a bio-based nylon essentially made from castor oil. It's meant to be fully recyclable, but you might need to check where you can do this, should you ever need to.

When it comes to sunglasses, the lighter they are, the more comfortable they sit on your nose and ears. The Chester Flux weighs 37.7g, which is plenty light enough, albeit 8-9 grams more than a set of Rokas and Van Rysels. They sit comfortably on my head with almost no pressure behind my ears from the rubber-coated tips, which do a good job of keeping them secure. I even tested them while running, and there was almost no bouncing, whether jogging slowly or pushing a bit harder.

They are 143mm wide at the hinge, 93mm wide at the tips, and with a lens that measures 58mm top to bottom, either side of the nose cutaway, offering good coverage. Protection from light, wind and airborne debris is excellent. I didn't have a problem with any of those things throughout the test.

The lenses also sat far enough away from my face so my eyelashes didn't touch the back of the lens. There's a bit of adjustment in the rubber nosepiece, meaning it can be squeezed in or opened up to help get them sitting in the right place.

Specifications

For a budget set of glasses, the lens technology is impressive. Our test pair came with the red lenses with 16.8% light transmittance (0% would let no light through, 100% would be a clear lens), which filters wavelengths that suit bright, sunny or partially clouded conditions. The contrast means they're suited to picking out greys, ideal for road riding. The contrast also seems fine with greens, so they're perfectly good on the trails too.

The profile of the lens is quite flat compared to a set of much more expensive Rokas or Oakleys, but this is where the main difference in lens technology is. The more shape there is in a lens, the more potential there is for distortion. Therefore, flatter lenses are easier to produce.

These have a gentle, consistent curve (many wraparound glasses curve more at the edges), so they look a little flat on the face, which is very much on trend, and have no distortion, even at the edges.

The lenses have an anti-scratch surface which I may or may not have tested. I've treated them carefully, and they remain scratch-free. Is that my careful nature, or the coating? From my experience with other riding glasses, these coatings only last so long and don't withstand too many drops, but they're proving resilient so far.

Performance

All the Flux lenses, including these ones, have an oleophobic coating which is meant to help with water gathering on the surface. When I splashed water on them, it did bead off quickly, but a few drops remained; good, but not foolproof.

I wore mine with a Van Rysel helmet, and despite their depth I didn't feel the helmet pushing down on them. They slotted into the helmet's side vents, just. But this is more of an issue with the helmet than the glasses. The Van Rysel Glasses weren't a great fit with the same helmet.

The glasses come in a zipped protective case with space for extra lenses and a cleaning bag. The lenses are easy to swap out by holding the hinge with one hand and the lens with the other, then pulling them apart. They snap back into place easily, too.

Value

Overall, this is a great pair of glasses. No one is going to be giving you envious glances or accuse you of trying to emulate your favourite rider, and they'll probably be surprised when you tell them how much they cost.

BBB Cycling has come up with an on-trend design and put some good lenses in the frame. The result is a good pair of wraparound sunnies that you can use for cycling, running or any other sport for that matter. They'll stay put on your head and keep bright light, wind, and most dust and debris out of your eyes.

Testing them through the summer meant the only thing I couldn't test was the anti-fog properties. I'll update this test when I do.

Tech spec

• Price: £42-61 (prices vary online)
• Frame: Full frame
• Lens: High contrast (category 3)
• Weight: 38g
• UV protection: Yes
• Material: Rilsan (bio-based nylon)

Megamo is not a leading brand in the road bike space. However, the Girona-based company has a decorated history over on the bumpier side, its mountain bikes have delivered riders to the podium at the Absa Cape Epic with the Buff-Megamo team. It’s only recently that Megamo has expanded into the road bike space. In such a competitive market, however, it takes a lot to stand out – a fact that's become even more apparent with Chinese brands offering high spec builds at increasingly competitive prices.

The bike we tested is the Megamo Pulse 04 SLR - the Iberian brand’s best road bike offering. It looks the part and is handsomely appointed, but value alone is not going to win over new customers – attributes such as aesthetics, value and dynamics need to be met; after thorough testing, I reckon the Pulse has nailed all three. It’s also not as ubiquitous as the mainstream bike companies and model ranges, which might be an issue for some but also a unique attribute to others.

We spent over 500km getting to know the Megamo Pulse 04 SLR and came away impressed by what it offers as a package compared to the perennial favourites.

Technical details

While the Megamo Pulse cuts a pretty sleek facade in profile with a dropped seatstay configuration, it could be argued it looks somewhat generic, but the sublime paintwork helps lift the overall visual package. Dubbed ‘White Ice’, the finish looks completely flat from a distance; but closer inspection reveals an intricately detailed, shimmering pattern that mimics icicles. To further boost the visual clout, a purple Megamo wordmark logo dominates the downtube with Pulse markings on the fork. There’s even a purple chain.

It really is a good-looking bike and one that attracted its fair share of interest from onlookers – as mentioned earlier, Megamo is not a mainstream road bike brand, and this is even more prominent in the UK.

The bike is impressively light, utilising the company’s Super Light Race (SLR) high-modulus carbon fibre chassis that is claimed to balance stiffness, compliance, and weight. In size medium, a ready-to-paint frame and fork weigh 924g/458g, respectively – which is in line with Specialized’s Fact 10r Tarmac SL8 carbon frames. Tyre clearance is up there with the very best road bikes at 34mm front and rear, which should appease those who enjoy the comfort and versatility afforded by wider tyres.

The Pulse is available in five sizes: XS, S, M, L, and XL. At 175cm tall and with longer arms and legs typical of my height, I opted for a size large Pulse - besides, the 55.8cm top tube, 410cm chainstays and a sub-metre wheelbase (997cm) aren't too far off some of the medium frames I enjoy riding.

The frame angles are balanced with a 72.5-degree head and 73.25-degree seat tube angle matched to an aggressive 557 and 390mm stack and reach – these numbers are spot on for the category.

Specifications

The Pulse 04 SLR is handsomely appointed and gains a SRAM Force AXS groupset, complete with a power meter and a 48/35T, 10-33T gearing configuration. In size large, Megamo has paired the Pulse with 172.5mm cranks - shorter (160/165mm) and longer (174mm) options are available depending on the frame size. Call me a traditionalist or maybe even a late adopter, but I much prefer the leverage afforded by longer cranks. I particularly enjoyed the 172.5mm cranks on the Pulse test bike as I prefer grinding a bigger gear as opposed to spinning. Who knows, maybe I’ll convert to shorter options in the future, but for now, 170-172,5mm seems an optimal crank length for me.

Integration was a big focus on the bike, so Megamo has ensured no visible brake hoses or cables and matched the Pulse with an integrated carbon handlebar configuration – 410mm/110mm in this size, which looked wide at first but felt good in practice and performed decently in the ergonomic stakes overall. Again, bar width and stem length are dependent on frame size.

Rolling stock is handled by Zipp’s 303 S carbon wheels and 30mm Pirelli P Zero Race TLR tyres, configured with inner tubes.

The sum of these parts totals a respectable 7.4kg without pedals – again, this is the going weight for this frame size and component configuration. That said, with such a light frame and fork, it won't take much to get the bike close to or under 7kg. As an experiment, I fitted a pair of Zipp 202 wheels, which dropped the Pulse under the seven-kilo barrier at 6.9kg.

Further weight can be trimmed by ditching the Fizik Vento Antares R5 saddle for a 100g lighter carbon-railed version, and then there's the option of fitting TPUs, too.

While Megamo doesn't share complete build weights on its website, I expect the posher models in the range include the Pulse 00 SLR (SRAM Red AXS) and Pulse 01 SLR (Shimano Dura-Ace Di2) to weigh under 7kg.

Performance

The Pulse is a well-balanced bike, and very easy to ride. It’s stable in crosswinds and planted during high-speed cornering, which provides the rider with loads of confidence in challenging conditions. The geometry is spot on for its size and intentions – it is a race bike after all but doesn’t feel overly aggressive. The riding position falls squarely between upright and stretched out, allowing you to assume a semi-neutral position without the back and neck niggles often associated with race bike geometry.

Climbing is a breeze, too. At 7.4kg, the Pulse is neither the lightest nor heaviest bike in the segment; instead it represents the middle ground and doesn't hold you back when gravity comes into the equation. It devours elevation in very much the same way as a Cannondale SuperSix Evo or Specialized Tarmac. During testing, it allowed me to hold a good climbing speed over all the lumps and bumps that comprise the UK's Surrey Hills.

The same goes for rolling roads where very little pedal input is needed to keep it sailing along - it’s very impressive. And when things do ever get super steep, the stiff bottom bracket and head tube provide enough response to quickly power up any kickers.

Once up and over the other side, the bike’s dynamic character comes to the fore, thanks to the neutral frame angles – it’s super planted and predictable on the descents but also reactive to steering inputs. To improve front-end grip and communication, I got the steerer cut to drop the bars and remove some spacers. This not only reduced the effective stack but also helped place more weight over the front wheel for improved front-wheel traction in the corners.

Speaking of grip, the Pirelli tyres offered decent grip - even in the stock inner tube configuration - but should perform better at lower pressures and set up tubeless. I kept the bike as close to stock as possible during the entire test period and was very impressed with its behaviour throughout. It was only when traversing choppier, broken road surfaces that the ride quality became apparent - again, this can be tuned by lowering tyre pressure, but the associated vibrations experienced are expected on poor roads.

The Zipp 303 S wheels offer good straight-line performance and aerodynamics, and are very stable during cross winds. The whole platform is rock solid, and one of the better-performing bikes I've tested all year.

Value

Considering the crowded space, the Megamo Pulse 04 SLR makes a serious case for itself as a genuine race bike. As far as looks go, its unique paintwork and contrasting branding and iconography make for a bold and attractive bike - as does the modern design and silhouette. It’s well specced and will appeal to the ardent racer wanting a reliable performer able to keep up, compete, and hold its own against the established marques.

The Megamo Pulse 04 SLR will set you back £6,199/ $6,500/ €5,999 - which is still a significant outlay, but considering rivals such as the Cannondale SuperSix Evo 1 Hi-Mod, Scott Addict RC Team and Specialized Tarmac SL8 Pro are £700-1,000 more, it’s a bike worth considering – even if it’s still a leftfield option. While it lacks the brand cachet of the more mainstream brands, it delivers an equally engaging riding experience, and maybe even better in some instances.

With an all-new Pulse platform already upon us, you can expect some discounts on the outgoing Pulse pictured here, making it an even more attractive race bike option. Megamo will continue to sell the new Pulse and outgoing Pulse alongside each other.

Tech spec

• Price: £6,199/ $6,500/ €5,999
• Brand: Megamo
• Frame: Carbon Advanced Composite Super Light Race Frame
• Fork: Carbon Advanced Composite fork
• Weight: 7.40kg (actual, Large)
• Sizes: XS, S, M, L, XL
• Levers: SRAM Force AXS
• Brakes: SRAM Force AXS
• Rear derailleur: SRAM Force AXS
• Front derailleur: SRAM Force AXS
• Crankset: SRAM Force AXS, 48/35T
• Cassette: SRAM Force AXS, 10-33T
• Wheels: Zipp 303 S
• Tyres: Pirelli P Zero Race TLR Classic, 30mm
• Bar/stem: Megamo Carbon integrated, 110x410mm
• Seatpost: Aerodynamic Advanced Carbon
• Saddle: Fizik Vento Antares R5

Much of cycling's apparel advancement over the past three decades of my cycling career has genuinely been about improving performance.

Be it technical features, cut, or even comfort, each phase has raised the benchmark in sporting prowess - but what, in my opinion, has taken a backwards step is this current phase for pastel colourways.

With even the best cycling jerseys succumbing to this sugary trend, it's one trend that I just can't, so I've increasingly found myself stuck in invisible black jersey funk.

That was until the Paria R-01 Short Sleeve Jersey.

Technical details

UK-based brand Paria has steadily been earning a bit of a cult-like following, filling the gap between boring cycling kit block or faded colours. Their motto is "Ride Loud," and they're best known for collaborating with alternative artists, breweries, and rock bands.

However, beneath the edgy aesthetics, which quite frankly are the most exciting designs since the 'Euro fluro' colourways of the early 2010's, lies, according to the brand, some serious technical apparel.

Made from an 88% polyester and 12% elastane (130g/m²) fabric mix, the Paria R-01 Short Sleeve Jersey is claimed to have been optimised for temperatures ranging from 18°C to 30°C, and even boasts an extended range of 15°C–35°C if suitably accessorised or stripped of a baselayer.

This temperature range is achieved by changing the fabric weave, with the back being a more opaque stretch fabric than the front, which is more open and highly breathable.

The fit is designed to be race-fit: high-compression; in other words, small really does mean small. If you are unsure of your exact size, erring on the side of caution and sizing up would be your best bet.

This is with the side note that there are both male and female fit options of the R-01 Short Sleeve Jersey, and, as you have probably guessed, I was riding the women's fit.
There are actually several designs for both genders to choose from, all of which I appreciate, although I have noted that the men's have a couple more, including this one.

Whatever your gender, all the jerseys share the same features: three open rear pockets and one small zip-secure one, a five-centimetre silicone hem gripper that circumnavigates the entire jersey, raw-cut, bonded, finished sleeves, and a low-profile collar.

Performance

The Paria R-01 is, hands down, the most complimented women's jersey I've ever worn. Everyone shares in the joy of an outlandish colourway and asks where it came from - even other clothing brands.

Riding the R-01 on several summer rides, I found the 130g/m² fabric blend incredibly efficient at moving sweat away from the skin. On climbs where the internal thermostat started redlining, I found that the material dried rapidly, preventing that cold, clammy feeling on the subsequent descents.

The Paria's quoted optimal temperature range of 18°C to 30°C is spot-on. I just did away with an undervest when riding above 30 degrees and still found the R-01 to be perfect. The robust wraparound silicone hem gripper ensures the jersey stays put, never riding up or swinging round, even on some pretty challenging off-road routes.

I did suffer the odd roll-up moment - but this was totally down to the size being a tad too small for my hips. The same goes for the arms. Designed with a 'modern' aero fit that finishes just above your elbow, the tightness of the fit depends on your biceps size.

As someone who now regularly strength trains, I found there was no slack to pinch any fabric. Note to all: small means small, so size up if you're debating which size is best, although even if it is tight, it will remain in full colour, with no whitening 'grin-through' distortion that can be found on under-dyed fibres.

R-01 features standard triple rear pockets. They are reinforced to prevent sag, meaning you can load them up with a phone, a multi-tool, and several gels without the jersey bouncing around on your lower back. They also sit high enough to feel secure but are jersey size dependent. So again, my small jersey meant small pockets, which did mean my XL iPhone 13 had to squeeze in, rather than slot, but at least I knew it was secure; it just made grabbing images on the fly a little more challenging, as it took longer to get my phone in and out of the pocket.

Value

At £89/$102, the Paria R-01 sits in an interesting sweet spot within the cycling apparel market. It isn't an entry-level budget kit, but it consciously undercuts the eye-watering prices of mainstream "premium" brands such as Rapha, Maap, or Pas Normal Studios, where equivalent race-fit jerseys frequently push past £160/ $215.

For your money, you are getting genuine technical performance - such as the high-wicking 130g/m² fabric blend, reliable YKK hardware, and tailored, flap-free panelling - without paying the "brand tax" associated with the sport's giant labels.

Better than that, it bridges the gap between team kit and meek pastels that see me reaching for my full goth emo look of all-black kit. While its ultra-aggressive cut requires casual riders to size up, it is a high-value, pro-level choice for cyclists who want to ride fast without looking like a box of macarons.

Tech spec

• Price: £89/ $102
• Pockets: Three
• Fit: Race
• Type: Short sleeve
• Colours: Leopard print (tested), Black raw, Wreckerboard
• Sizes: XS, S, M, L, XL, XXL

The need to go faster has turned gravel racing into an arms race, with everything from helmets and clothing to frames and components undergoing extensive R&D and wind-tunnel testing to improve overall speed. One of the easiest and cost-effective ways to unlock performance is upgrading to a set of the best gravel bike wheels, and this applies to all disciplines - even gravel riding.

While several companies, such as Zipp and Parcours, have been early adopters of the aero gravel wheel concept with their respective 303 XPLR SW and FKT, West Sussex-based Strada Wheels has also jumped on the aero gravel bandwagon and developed a go-faster gravel wheelset - the Strada Gravel Aero Plus 2.

The Strada Gravel Aero Plus 2 has been designed to provide a reliable gravel wheel at an affordable price, with myriad build options and weights available. I say ‘developed’ because these are not generic, open-mould wheels but rather designed and built in-house by Strada, to improve speed, control and comfort on technically demanding, rough terrain.

We’ve been using the Gravel Aero Plus 2 wheels in all manner of terrain and weather, including traditional gravel and mountain bike trails, and the results have been mighty impressive.

Technical details

The Strada Gravel Aero Plus 2 wheels are constructed from unidirectional carbon fibre and built to modern standards, featuring a mixed front/rear rim height of 40/45mm and matched to a 30mm internal rim width, positioning it squarely between the Parcours FKT (27mm) and Zipp 303 XPLR SW (32mm) wheelsets. Owing to the nature of gravel terrain and the reality of bottoming out tyres at lower pressures, the wheels have been constructed with hookless uprights and a 3.5mm impact zone. Like the Parcours Alta and FKT gravel wheels, the flatter rim edge has been raised and reinforced to reduce stress concentrations around the rim, improving impact protection and compliance.

The front and rear wheels utilise tailored rim profiles and layups, as the air path, rim impacts, and applied forces differ greatly between the front and rear. As a result, while both wheels employ the same internal width and 36.5mm external width, the front rim is constructed from T700 fibres, while the rear rim is made from T800-grade carbon. The big party trick here, however, comes from resin used in the layup to bind the fibres, something Strada calls advanced viscoelastic resin matrix, which is claimed to “absorb vibration, increase durability, and enhance overall ride feel”.

In terms of tyres, the Gravel Aero Plus 2 was optimised around 40-45mm tyres, but is compatible with widths spanning everything from 35mm to a gargantuan 62mm (2.4-inches), so it will play nicely with a slew of recently launched wide-tyre gravel bikes such as the BMC Kaius, Factor Sarana and Open Wi.De 2.0.

Both wheels are laced using 24 aero-bladed Alpina spokes: Ultralite at the front and Extralite at the rear. The wheels can be built to your personal specifications and needs, with hub options from Hope, DT Swiss, ExtraLite, and Tactic. Our test pair came with DT Swiss 240 EXP hubs featuring a 36T ratchet that provides a 10-degree engagement angle.

Visually, the wheels are stealthy yet striking and should complement most gravel bike colour schemes and design themes. Our test pair came with black-on-black decals, but if you require a bolder visual impact, a white decal kit is included in the box.

While system weight was not the chief focus of this wheelset, the Strada Gravel Aero Plus 2 tipped our scales at 1,465g (680g/785g front/rear with rim tape and valves fitted) for the pair - a little heavier than the claimed 1,426g but still lighter than both the Parcours FKT (1,500g) and Zipp 303 XPLR SW (1,496g) wheels.

Performance

While the Strada Gravel Aero 2 has some stiff competition, they don’t feel inferior in any way. In fact, out in the real world, they feel as controlled and fast as rivals from Zipp and Parcours, maybe even better on lumpier terrain and in windy conditions.

At just under 62kg, I paired the Stradas with 45mm Vittoria Terreno T30 rubber, set at 25psi all round – a little lower than I usually ride but, considering my tyre inserts ( a non-negotiable for me since Gravel Burn), wide internal rim width and tall hookless beads, I felt confident with the setup throughout my testing period. The front-end control on my Cannondale SuperX Lab71 was sublime, allowing me to eke out maximum traction around fast, washed-out corners, and the ride quality was plush yet communicative.

While I can't say I actively felt the effects of the viscoelastic resin matrix, it didn't feel like I was wrestling with the bike or bouncing off the pedals when the terrain was choppy and corrugated, unlike with other wheels I’ve sampled. Of course, this reduction in upper-body fatigue can be attributed to the low tyre pressures, but there’s only so much pressure manipulation can do to nullify high-frequency vibrations, and I never felt that the wheels slowed me down during these situations.

I feel the 40/45mm rim depth is a sweet spot for gravel riding and racing. This height is deep enough to improve aerodynamics and shallow enough to stave off crosswinds. Throughout the test period, the wheels tracked accurately on high-speed descents and provided the confidence needed for off-road riding.

Climbing is a breeze, too. They’re not the lightest wheels around, but are far from the heaviest either, so you can wind them up pretty quickly and sail over rolling terrain. The rear hub engages quickly and helps keep progress swift and hesitation-free. It’s only on super-steep pitches where you’ll need to summon your skills to ensure weight is evenly distributed over both axles to avoid wheelspinning and coming to a halt.

I also tested the wheels on some mountain bike singletrack that comprises sections of my gravel test routes. These trails are notably technical, with small drops and very sandy corners, but the Stradas managed comfortably and, dare I say, even smoothed off some of the step-downs and bumps. Very impressive indeed.

Value

With such quality options among the best aero gravel wheelsets, it’s going to come down to preference and brand loyalty, but it’s hard not to recommend the Strada Gravel Aero 2 wheels. While the Strada Gravel Aero 2 wheels are £250 pricier than the Parcours FKT in base spec, they’re £100 cheaper than the Zipp 303 XPLR SW, trumping both when it comes to weight and spread of compatible tyre widths. (Pricing creeps up depending on hub choice).

As someone who considers themselves neutral and objective, I was pleasantly surprised by the performance and stability afforded by the Strada Gravel Aero 2 wheel platform - not only do they feel fast on all terrain, they are super-reliable and durable, and that’s what you want on technically demanding gravel events and even stage races. They comfortably dismissed washboard surfaces and ensured average speeds on flat gravel roads were high.

While it’s hard to quantify whether they’re better than their rivals, based on the ability to run super-wide tyres alone, I’m inclined to say the Strada Aero Gravel 2 wheels will stay relevant for the next couple of years. Well, at least until we know where the whole 32-inch wheel agenda is headed…

Tech specs

• Price: £1,499 / $2,020 / €1,750
• Weight: 1,465g (actual)
• Hubset: DT Swiss 240 EXP
• Freehub options: Shimano HG11/12, SRAM XDR, Campagnolo
• Rim depth: 40mm front, 45mm rear
• Rim width: 30mm internal, 36.5mm external
• Spoke count: 24 front/rear
• Rim: Hookless

Canyon launched the new Endurace CFR with one goal in mind: to help Mathieu van der Poel win Paris-Roubaix. And while that didn’t quite work out, with van der Poel opting to use his Aeroad CFR instead, the Endurace CFR platform is still a mighty impressive bike. After all, van der Poel did win the E3 Saxo Classic on the new Endurace CFR in its first outing, proving its prowess for taming cobbles and tough terrain. For riders seeking a more relaxed geometry, the regular Endurace CF and CF SLX are more in line with the endurance-bike recipe and even boast greater tyre clearances than the CFR, as well as provision for mudguards and on-bike storage.

I’ve spent a lot of time on the Endurace CFR – both at the global press camp in the Flemish Ardennes and back home on the rough surfaces of the UK. With upwards of a thousand kilometres in the saddle to date, the Endurace CFR has failed to disappoint me. If anything, the wider tyre clearances (compared to options from the best aero race bikes), combined with the racy fit and aero-inspired frame, make for one of the most entertaining and rapid machines for broken roads.

It’s not perfect, however, and some niggles pertaining to the handlebar configuration and specification choices sully an otherwise impressive package.

Technical details

The similarities between the new Canyon Endurace CFR and Aeroad CFR are glaringly obvious, but by no means a mistake – Canyon’s modus operandi was to create a bike able to compete at the sharp end in the Spring Classics without impacting the fit and rider position of the Aeroad CFR. The most notable changes are the seatpost and seat tube cutouts, which have been tweaked to accommodate wider tyres – 35mm versus the 32mm maximum clearance on the Aeroad. The fork and headset hardware, however, are identical to the Aeroad, as is much of the geometry. Keeping things largely in line with the German brand’s aero bike means the new Endurace CFR is the fastest endurance bike it’s ever made, testing within 1 watt of the Aeroad at 45km/h in the Tour Magazine wind tunnel test protocol: 204 vs 205w.

The Endurace CFR is constructed from Toray T1100, T800, and YS80 pitch-based fibres to balance strength and stiffness. This layup makes the frame naturally very stiff yet compliant enough to ensure comfort over choppy terrain. The Endurace CFR also gets a new SP0093 VCLS Aero seatpost, claimed to improve ride quality - an industry-first aero-comfort post that offers 25 per cent more compliance over a rigid post.

Owing to the Aeroad CFR-inspired geometry and blueprint, the big news pertains to the tyre clearance. Canyon reckons 32mm is no longer the upper limit but rather the baseline for Spring Classic race bikes, with the new Endurace CFR now able to clear 35mm front and rear. According to Canyon, tyre widths can be pushed even further to 40mm in dry race conditions, but this is not recommended outside the WorldTour due to potential frame damage and warranty voiding.

The new Endurace CFR is available in three colour options (Pro Black, Paradigm Shift, and Dark Matter) and six sizes: 2XS, XS, S, M, L and XL. Sizing is a little larger than other brands', so I suggest checking Canyon’s sizing chart to ensure the best fit. In retrospect, I should have sized down to a small, but based on my body measurements (I can ride both 54 or 56cm), Canyon reckoned I’d get away with riding a medium. The fit is not typical of the classic endurance bikes, as the Sport Pro Geometry allows Canyon-sponsored riders to seamlessly switch between Endurace CFR and Aeroad CFR race setups.

While the geometry is not identical to the Aeroad CFR, it is very similar with a marginally longer wheelbase and chainstays for improved stability. In size medium, the parallel head and seat tube angles of 73.25 and 73.1 degrees are spot-on for this racing application and complement the aggressive stack (563mm) and reach (393mm).

Specifications

The Endurace CFR can be specced in one of two configurations: SRAM Red AXS or Shimano Dura-Ace Di2, it all comes down to your preferences. The bike pictured here came outfitted in the latter, complete with 50/37T, 10-33T gearing configuration, which I felt was an ideal spread for the terrain that comprises the Surrey Hills.

As has become de rigueur in the pro peloton, there are a host of crank options available depending on the frame size. My size medium test bike came standard with 165mm crankarms, down from 172.5mm. Your optimal crank length, however, can also be specified from 165 to 175mm in the MyCanyon programme.

System weight wasn’t a driving motivator when designing the new Endurace, but the engineers still made sure it came in as light as possible. Considering that many of the regular aero race bikes are between 7.4-7.6kg (especially in Spring Classics trim), Canyon has nailed the system weight. Our medium test bikes tipped the scales at 7.55kg without pedals – a number you can reduce by 120g by speccing the CP0053 Race bar.

The balance of the build comprises a Canyon SP0093 VCLS Aero seatpost, Selle Italia SLR saddle, 65mm DT Swiss Arc 1100 wheels wrapped in 35mm Pirelli Pzero RS tyres and a Canyon CP0048 Pace bar with classic drops.

Performance

The Endurace CFR doesn’t ride like a typical endurance bike, and I personally don't think it should be classed as one, if I’m honest. It’s more of an Aeroad CFR with more utility. The riding position is aggressive, and the geometry has been tuned to deliver a fit similar to the Aeroad CFR, a race-honed platform with no ties to the endurance concept. As a result, riders need to be aware of this and shop accordingly – the Endurace CF SLX and CF are the bona fide endurance platforms in the range.

When I tested the bike in Belgium, I was blown away by the way it handled cobblestones and poor roads. I was also impressed by its descending prowess and ability to accelerate quickly out of corners, but I was unsure how this would translate to my typical riding routes back in the UK. I didn't expect it to be as fast as some of the racier bikes I’ve been riding on home roads, but it blew me away - particularly the average speeds and overall riding manners of the platform. I do feel this stems from the lower pressures of the 35mm tyres, but also the lateral compliance of the seatpost – the combination of which has resulted in more tyre staying in contact with the road surface, absorbing imperfections and not skimming over the terrain.

I felt the front end was a bit too high for my liking, as the CP0048 Pace bar spacers essentially increased the effective stack height and shortened the reach a touch, resulting in not getting enough weight over the front axle during cornering. The handlebar system, however, is designed to offer 20mm of height adjustment without cutting the steerer or brake hoses, but I couldn’t get it sorted in time for this test.

Overall, the bike is super grippy in the corners, thanks to the 35mm tyres. I went pretty low on the tyres, with 40psi front/rear proving ideal for my weight. I was very impressed by the stock Pirelli PZero RS tyres – the compound is balanced, delivering good grip and rolling efficiency. The shorter cranks also mean you can scythe through corners with ease and confidence, and get on the pedals earlier, thanks to the greater crank clearance at aggressive lean angles. Gearing is impressive, and you won't feel hampered on descents thanks to the 50/37T, 10-33T drivetrain. There’s ample range for steep kickers and longer climbs, too.

The boxy frame profile, together with the 65mm DT Swiss Arc 1100 wheels, means the bike can be a handful in crosswinds or gusts, requiring the drops to be kept in check to improve control. It’s nothing to be alarmed by and can be totally solved by fitting a shallower front wheel.

Value

The Canyon Endurace CFR is an impressive bike. Melding the aerodynamics of the Aeroad CFR platform with wider tyres clearances and comfort has resulted in an outrageously capable machine that can dismiss poor road surfaces at unnoticeably fast speeds.

While it’s not quite what I’d consider a veritable endurance bike, I do undersratnd Canyon made this particular bike to solve an issue riders and teams had with the Aeroad CFR: tyre clearance. Should it be called the Endurace CFR? Maybe not, as it’s more of an Aeroad CFR Plus than a veritable Endurace – the Endurace CF SLX and CF prove this, but that doesn’t take away from a really impressive bike.

I suspect it will appeal more to the Aeroad CFR owner who wants greater tyre clearance and comfort while keeping the same racy fit, but this, coupled with the £8,500 / $10,499 / €9,000 sticker price, puts it out of the picture for a large portion of the cycling demographic. There are other options within the range, including the Endurace CF SLX and CF platform, which offer more relaxed upright fits, greater utility, more affordable pricing and even larger tyre clearances.

Tech spec

• Price: £8,500 / $10,499 / €9,000
• Brand: Canyon
• Frame: Canyon Endurace CFR-Pro
• Fork: Canyon FK0137 CF Disc
• Weight: 7.55kg (actual, medium)
• Sizes: 2XS, XS, S, M, L, XL
• Levers: SRAM Red AXS
• Brakes: SRAM Red AXS, 160/140mm front/rear
• Rear derailleur: SRAM Red AXS
• Front derailleur: SRAM Red AXS
• Crankset: SRAM Red AXS 50/37T
• Bottom bracket: SRAM Dub Press-fit
• Cassette: SRAM Red AXS 10-33T
• Chain: SRAM RedE1 Flattop, 12-speed
• Wheels: DT Swiss Arc 1100 65mm
• Tyres: Schwalbe One TLR 28mm
• Bar/stem: Canyon CP0048 Pace T-Bar
• Seatpost: Canyon SP0093 VCLS Aero
• Saddle: Selle Italia SLR Carbon

If you were to draw a Venn diagram and put cycling apparel in one circle, hiking in another, and Scandi-cool in the third, where they meet in the middle, the words Fjällräven cycling range would be written.

This isn't the brand's first foray into cycling kit. Its first was a Specialized co-lab that brought us adult rompers, anoraks and flannel. At the time, this radical take on bike kit firmly challenged even the more open-minded riders on what a new kit day should look like.

Four short years on, although Fjällräven has moved on from banana-yellow colour schemes, there has been a boom in bikepacking and 'gorpcore' fashion (yes, it's a thing), and we cyclists have become far more accustomed to wearing multi-use cycling attire.

This trend has been a springboard for the new Fjällräven Hoja collection, the brand's first fully in-house-designed, dedicated cycling and bike-packing line-up, with the Hoja bib shorts at its core.

But while they may well tick the on-trend box, do they tick the best cycling shorts box?

Technical details

Fjällräven says it has constructed the main body of the shorts using 70% polyester (recycled), 30% elastane, and, according to the brand, buying using what it calls a circular knit offers a structured and supportive fit. And thanks to hydrophilic properties, they also stay dry.

The upper torso of the Hoja bibs ups the polyester (and recycled) level to 92% polyester (recycled) and 8% elastane, which aims to create ventilated, comfortable straps.

Looking deeper into the brand's environmental credentials, it's one of the better ones for presenting an audit chain for its sustainable credentials; however, I haven't been able to, as yet, get sight of the source of the recycled fabric, as its last sustainability and CSR (corporate social responsibility) report was back in 2024.

It's safe to say, however, that the fabric will be PFAS-free and ethically sourced, in line with the usual Fjällräven standards.

In the middle of the Hojas sits 'floating' chamios. This reduction in secured layers, stitched or otherwise, means the shorts dry much faster, which is key when washing and wearing them on back-to-back riding days.

The other key feature is the drop tail for easy access for toilet breaks mid-ride. I'm pleased to see that Fjällräven has kept to its 'clean' design ethos and kept this as simple as possible by simply inserting a split design between the bibs and shorts at the back.

It's interesting to see that this is a feature on both men's and women's shorts, whereas it's normally just the reserve of women's. In fact, the only gender-specific feature is the sizing - notably the short length, with the women's leg measuring 22cm, one centimetre longer than the men's version.

Back to generic features, and you'll find a mesh cargo pocket on each leg and a very generous strip of high-vis fabric running parallel to the pockets on each leg, too.

Performance

Donning bib shorts for the first ride requires the chamois squish test. It's immediately apparent that the Fjällräven Hoja have done something radical here.

The seat pad is tacked in place front and rear, and that's it. You can feel the foam padding sections beneath the layer against your skin - but there are no thermally welded channels or stitched contours.

Sliding them on for the first ride, I worried I'd be taken back to my first pair of Impsport shorts, which had all the technical padding of a reusable nappy. After a hot, sweaty 10-mile ride on tougher-than-traditional 'gravel', my fears were eased. My backside returned friction-burn-free. It turns out we may have all been overthinking how much contouring our padding needs.

They also gave me enough protection for back-to-back riding days. Admittedly, I'm not riding more than three hours at a time, and I can ride pretty much any slimline saddle, cutout or otherwise. So the Hoja Body Geometry Contour Chamois will work for some people and not for others.

I can also confirm they dried quicker than a regular pair of bib shorts. For full transparency, I used a washing machine, not a mountain stream, and dried them on a washing line, not a rock, with a three-rider household - I could directly compare them with a pair of Lusso and Peal Izumi (both with foam contoured padding).

After a few more rides in the Fjällräven Hoja shorts, I realised I hadn't thought about the bib straps or torso elements. This instinctive reaction puts the shorts firmly in the excellent, comfortable-fit category. Not even noticing how the straps fit on my shoulders, across my back, or around my middle speaks to their comfort.

There's nothing fancy or high-tech about this upper design, which confirms my stance on all women's cycling shorts: 'stop over-complicating the structure'!

Even with a dropped seat for quick pit stops, a feature I usually detest, it wasn't an issue. The team behind the Hoja simply attached the straps to the sides of the shorts, not the back - and hey presto, you can pull them down while staying fully clothed.
I've not yet tested these shorts on full multiday rides in the wild.

So far, I've just put a few ride snacks on one side (right) and litter on the other (left). But they are huge and would take a jacket, phone, tools, etc. In fact, they're probably too big for me, as even lightweight stuff bouncing on my thigh annoys me; the idea of a multi-tool sliding around with every pedal stroke would be sensory overload and wreck my ride.

The only other thing I'm considering is size. I'm nearly always a medium in cycling shorts, but these are on the loose side; even after checking the size guide, they are generous. Something to consider if you want a racier fit.

Value

At £195/ $245, the Fjällräven Hoja Bib Shorts sit squarely in the premium tier of the cycling apparel market. They are competing directly with the very best in gravel bike clothing and have topped the prices of some of the top brands in the field, such as Assos Mille GT and Rapha Core Cargo.

So presenting value at such a high price point, in an already highly competitive market, is a tough gig.

Fjällräven has gone all out for bikepacking optimisation: Features like the fast dry time of the floating chamois and the seamless drop-tail functionality (in a non-convoluted way) solve real, tangible problems for adventure cyclists.

But if you're not looking for multiday unsupported rides, then these might be somewhat over-specc'ing your ride requirements.

That said, you will get a very comfortable pair of bib shorts with the Fjällräven stamp of sustainability and eco-friendly manufacturing; you won't be disappointed.

Tech spec

• Price: £195/ $245
• Weight: 197-233g
• Chamois style: Floating
• Storage: Two double-stretch mesh
• Leg type: Shorts
• Colours: Black
• Sizes: XXS, XS, S, M, L, XL

Cannondale dropped the covers off its fifth-generation SuperSix Evo to mixed reception, with many pundits calling out the American brand for a lack of design creativity and progression. Cannondale says it’s not a mistake that its best road bike resembles its predecessor – after all, the SuperSix Evo version four was ridden to great success, bagging top honours at the World Championships, Olympic Games, and Grand Tour stages during its tenure, but there was still room for improvement.

To capitalise on an already superb formula, the Connecticut-based firm elected to refine rather than revolutionise the SuperSix Evo platform by improving aerodynamics through subtle changes to the tube shapes and new layups. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with this trend, and the lack of radical design progression suggests Cannondale might have other plans to renew the SystemSix platform down the line.

The SuperSix Evo portfolio is comprehensive enough to offer something for every budget, including the range-topping Lab71 models, but it's no surprise that the best value is found further down the range – the SuperSix Evo 2 we've managed to get our hands on is a case in point.

Technical details

The new SuperSix Evo bears a striking resemblance to its predecessor, and every shape save for the upper seat tube cross-section has been reworked. Closer examination reveals a deeper head tube and reprofiled fork legs and crown, introduced to improve aerodynamics. As it’s compatible only with electronic groupsets, all ports and holes from the previous model have been removed. There’s even a new dust cover on the headtube, a new integrated seatpost grommet, and a redesigned Di2 battery holder to improve the fit and finish.

This particular model is available in two colourways – Raw (grey) or Tungsten Blue, as pictured here. I quite like this paint scheme as it adds a premium look and feel to the package. As a more affordable model in the range, the SuperSix Evo 2 is constructed from lower-grade, standard-modulus carbon fibre but retains the same proportional-response philosophy as the Hi-Mod and Series 0 carbon layups. This ensures the stiffness indexing of the head tube and bottom bracket is progressive across frame sizes, delivering optimal mechanical properties scaled to rider size.

The geometry numbers are, for the most part, the same as before, with the chainstay length and head tube angles unchanged. However, due to a 10mm reduction in stack height, there are variations in the top tube, seat tube angle, standover height, wheelbase, and reach compared to the model it replaces. The frame sizing philosophy has also been tweaked, with the 51cm model of the previous generation replaced by two new sizes – 50 cm and 52cm - bringing the total number of frameset options to eight (44, 48, 50, 52, 54, 56, 58, 61cm).

Specifications

Despite lacking the posher specification sheets of its siblings, the SuperSix Evo 2 is outfitted with some decent componentry, including a Shimano Ultegra Di2 groupset, complete with a 52/36T, 11-30T chainset driven by 170mm crankarms. While you could upgrade the stock cockpit with the integrated SystemBar Road or SL cockpit from Lab71 and Hi-Mod models, the standard Vision Trimax Aero Carbon bar and Cannondale C1 Conceal alloy stem make it easier to swap parts. The bike rolls on 45mm DT Swiss ERC Log carbon wheels and 28mm Schwalbe One TLE tyres. Completing the build is a Cannondale C1 Aero carbon post and Fizik Vento Antares R5 saddle.

The only omission and something that isn't always expected at this price point is a power meter – it’s not a dealbreaker, though, and there are many aftermarket options if it's a major requirement.

Despite the third-tier carbon and second-tier components, the SuperSix Evo 2 is still a fairly feathery thing, coming in at 7.75kg without pedals – 150g heavier than claimed in size medium.

Performance

As mentioned in my February launch report, the new SuperSix Evo is quite sublime in the handling stakes – not that there was anything glaringly wrong with the dynamic prowess of its predecessor. If anything, the previous model lacked the front-end precision and speed of its rivals, but this appears to have been addressed. The lower stack height, reprofiled headtube, fork, and crown have bolstered the feel and communication from the front end, notably during high-speed cornering and descending. Granted, this change will have made it a little less attractive to riders who prefer the 'more relaxed' geometry of the outgoing.

As before, the SuperSix Evo has clearance for 32mm tyres, but some manufacturers reckon this width is no longer the upper limit for race tyres, with many citing 35mm as the new standard. Much like the new Specialized Tarmac SL9, which has also stuck with 32mm, you can shoehorn 34mm into both ends provided there’s 4mm of clearance. I feel 32mm is ample for UK roads, and from what I’ve been seeing on local rides, chaingangs, and races, 28mm is still the most common size across the board.

The SuperSix Evo 2 test bike came fitted with 28mm Schwalbe One TLR tyres set up with inner tubes. While I was craving the softer tyre pressures afforded by a tubeless configuration, the stock setup did a decent enough job of balancing comfort with communication and grip – granted, you’ll need to experiment a bit with a tyre pressure that complements your weight.

The ergonomics are excellent, both in terms of the Fizik Vento Antares R5 saddle and Vision Trimax Aero bar (the latter, however, is not perfect). My only bugbear was the stack of spacers under the stem, which lifted the front end and skewed my weight distribution over the front axle, and the two-piece Vision Trimax Aero bar and Conceal stem, which neither look as refined nor possess the same level of stiffness as the integrated SystemBar Road assembly I sampled at the launch. Other than that, I have nothing negative to report about how the bike rides and behaves.

As expected, it climbs well, too, and sails up inclines and rolling terrain with ease. While it doesn't stand out in any one area, as an all-rounder, it does a good job of dismissing anything that comes its way.

Value

Cannondale has done a good job with the fifth-generation SuperSix Evo. While some might see it more as a facelift than a genuine new model, the structural tweaks are more than meets the eye and have notably made a great bike even better – perhaps even perfected the all-rounder recipe in the process. Sure, the Vision Trimax Carbon Aero and Conceal stem lack the ergonomics and stiffness of the integrated SystemBar Road used on the premium model, but this is merely nitpicking on what is essentially a solid package.

While the SuperSix Evo 2 is one of the most affordable models in the range at £5,995 / $6,499 / €6,299, the SuperSix Evo 5 is another option that is hard to ignore based on all-round value. For £4,495 / $4,999 / €4,499, you get electronic shifting, carbon wheels, and a similar cockpit and saddle arrangement to the Evo 2. It is heavier, though, but the geometry and overall rider connection are unchanged.

If these options are still out of your price range, some markets - including the UK and US - still offer the previous-generation 105 Di2-equipped SuperSix Evo 3 for £4,000 / $4,499 (this model is currently discontinued across Europe).

Tech spec

• Price: £5,995 / $6,499 / €6,299
• Brand: Cannondale
• Frame: SuperSix Evo, carbon
• Fork: SuperSix Evo, carbon
• Weight: 7.75kg (actual, 54cm)
• Sizes: 44, 48, 50, 52, 54, 56, 58, 61cm
• Levers: Shimano Ultegra Di2 R8170
• Brakes: Shimano Ultegra RT-CL800, 160/140mm front/rear
• Rear derailleur: Shimano Ultegra Di2 R8150
• Front derailleur: Shimano Ultegra Di2 R8150
• Crankset:  Shimano Ultegra R8100 52/36T
• Bottom bracket: Shimano BB-RS500, BSA 68
• Cassette: Shimano Ultegra CS-R8100 11-34T
• Chain: Shimano Ultegra CN-M8100
• Wheels: DT Swiss ERC LOG 45 Carbon
• Tyres: Schwalbe One TLR 28mm
• Bar/stem: Vision Trimax Carbon Aero, Cannondale C1 Conceal
• Seatpost: Cannondale C1 Aero 40 Carbon V2
• Saddle: Fizik Vento Antares R5

The Factor One is quite unlike the cookie-cutter designs that dominate the contemporary road bike recipe, many of which look conservatively tame in comparison. It doesn't pretend to be anything other than a tool designed to scythe through the air and unapologetically keeps with the company’s radical design philosophy and Formula One-rooted history. Strip back the layers, however, and there’s an incredible story to be told about how it came to be and its forward-thinking geometry, not least how it rides and performs in the real world. It’s absolutely bonkers-fast.

Factor as a company is not new to creating machines of this nature - both the Vis Vires and Aston Martin One-77 bikes pushed the boundaries of design, aerodynamics, and integration and still look contemporary in today’s landscape. While the Factor One draws many parallels with those two bikes, the company’s ultimate goal was to push the design team's restless creativity to the absolute limit and build the fastest UCI-legal road frame ever - something that the brand claims to have achieved.

Our friends at Cyclingnews corroborated Factor's claims in their independent bike-only evaluations at the Silverstone Sports Engineering Hub. When tested with a rider, the Factor One effectively tied with the Cervelo S5.

With over 1,300km of saddle time, we’ve put together the most comprehensive test of the Factor One to date. It sure feels as fast as Factor claims, but what does that mean to the average rider, and are you better off with a regular aero bike?

Technical details

The Factor One’s visuals echo its speedy intentions with a blueprint designed to provoke rather than conform to UCI rules, some of which were relaxed in 2024. This allowed Factor’s head of engineering, Graham Shrive, and his design team to rethink how the fork and downtube intersect, resulting in a clever overlap and a deeper, forward-set fork configuration. Even though the ruleset was updated again for 2026 with a new law that caps the internal fork width at 115mm, the Factor One still falls within the safe zones. The result is one of the most extraordinary-looking front ends in modern bicycle design and something no other manufacturer has ever dared to explore.

The One has an outrageously narrow leading edge when viewed front-on, and the wide-set fork, forward-set chin fairing system, and super-deep headtube resemble those of a time-trial bike. The bayonet fork configuration not only ensures the steering axis remains in its traditional position but also pushes the front end out, reducing the effective stem length by 20mm. The long top tube, combined with the steeper 76-degree seat tube angle, places the rider forward relative to the bottom bracket.

On all my test rides, cyclists and non-cyclists alike were drawn to the Factor One in droves, often guffawing with delight at its unique facade and neapolitan ice-cream-like hue Factor calls ‘Blush’ – it really is a playful colourway, no riding incognito here. If the Blush theme doesn't tickle your fancy, there are three other options, including Silverstone (grey and cyan), Nimbus Grey (basically the Blush theme but in greyscale), and Onyx Black. I foresee the latter being the most popular colour among buyers, but the bold blue of the Bugatti Factor One is also a pretty awesome shade, albeit an outrageously expensive one…

The numbers are as radical as the bike looks and are fairly consistent across all five frame sizes (47, 52, 54, 56, 58cm). The 43mm fork rake, together with the steep 73-degree head angle, results in a 58mm trail figure – ideal for quick, reactive steering. The rear end is categorised by particularly short 405mm chainstays, while a sub-metre (988cm) wheelbase rounds out the headline numbers on our size 54cm test bike. Despite these progressive angles, the One is easy to set up.

Factor reckons many riders are already adopting forward-biased riding positions, categorised by slammed saddles, narrow handlebars, inline seatposts, shorter cranks and longer reach from massive stems. To counter the taller saddle heights that result from shorter cranks, Factor adjusted the bottom bracket drop to lower the centre of gravity and retain stability, ensuring the front-to-rear weight balance remained neutral.

Specifications

The stock gearing, however, lets down the package – in this instance, a 48/35T, 10-33T gearing assembly which is the same across both Force and Red AXS groupsets. While a 50/37T double chainring would have been the logical option, I didn't feel negatively impacted or held back at any point during the test period – even on long, fast descents. Furthermore, the 48-10T offers a marginally lower gear ratio of 4.8 when compared to the 52-11T of Shimano Dura-Ace or Ultegra Di2 groupsets, both of which are pegged at 4.72. That said, the front mech is adjustable and can accommodate a maximum chainring of 68T in one-by and 60/42T in a two-by configuration.

Several parts are handled by Factor’s in-house components division, Black Inc, including the 62mm-deep wheels, which are wrapped in 28mm Continental GP5000 S TR tyres, the brace of Black Inc aero bottle cages and the matching computer mount. The standard gullwing integrated bar system is also a Black Inc creation and quite a unique-looking system. Sizes are designated as 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, corresponding to stem equivalents of 110-150mm, with three high-rise options that provide an additional 20mm of stack. For reference, our test bike uses a fully slammed 38cm handlebar configuration matched to a 120mm effective stem length.

That said, a range of handlebar widths, spacers and effective stem lengths is also available, including a ‘Hi Rize’ configuration available in sizes 1, 2, and 3 (110-130mm effective stem lengths), ensuring a better fit for a wider range of riders. There are also two seatpost options (inline and offset). The offset post fitted to our Factor One test bike equates to zero setback on a bike such as the Ostro VAM, pushing the rider more forward towards the bottom bracket in ‘standard’ trim.

Performance

To fully appreciate the Factor One, you’ll need a solid understanding of weight distribution and grip, and the confidence to push it to the limits it was designed to reach. It’s got ride quality that some might describe as harsh, even unforgiving at times, but the upshot is a bike that’s full of feel and communication, something often lacking in modern aero bikes, which tend to prioritise comfort over precision. Much of this comes down to the oversized tubing and carbon layup, which make for an incredibly stiff frame and front end - comfort is not part of the package.

This is a bike that feels very much like a stripped-out track-day car, and in the same way you’d limit driving it to do your groceries owing to the lack of creature comforts and driver aids, the Factor One should be reserved exclusively for the habitat it was designed to tame: road races, time trials and circuit events.

It’s unbelievably agile with a direct and razor-sharp front end. The gullwing handlebar elevates this sensation with no discernible flex during sprinting and out-of-the-saddle attacks. The ‘stemless’ bar is fixed directly to the fork structure, a full 20mm ahead of the steerer axis, delivering incredibly precise steering. Keeping it at 40km/h requires very little effort, and once it inches past 50km/h, it becomes a game of how fast it can reel in the horizon line. I tested the One in a few time trials at varying distances, and the bike felt stable and as fast as a time-trial bike, limited only by my position. In fact, Factor told us that it will shortly be offering a time-trial cockpit for the One and that it tested within a few watts of its dedicated Hanzo time-trial bike.

While it’s pretty stable overall, it can be a handful at times, especially if you’re a nervous descender and typically struggle in crosswinds. The surface area of the frame and wide-set fork can catch gusts - but it’s a matter of weighing the front end by using the drops to help keep it planted and tracking accurately. In ideal conditions, it’s a precision tool that can be positioned and set up for every corner, allowing you to carry speed and avoid unnecessary braking. Choose your line, weight your outside leg, rail the apex and repeat. It’s super-intuitive and so much fun to ride at the limit. While you can unlock extra grip and maybe even a smidgeon more comfort with wider 30-32mm tyres, the stock Continental rubber (at 55psi front/rear) paired well with the Black Inc 62 wheels and measured slightly wider than the claimed 28mm.

And what of its climbing ability? Well, the Factor One does climb better than expected. At 7.9kg, it’s not the lightest bike around, but weight was never the focus of the project. Instead, you’ll need some tactical nous to cheat the terrain - as the Factor One can effortlessly flatten most rolling terrain with very little input, granted you keep the speed high. It’s only when traversing double-digit, punchy topography that you will need to work a little harder to overcome gravity.

Value

The Factor One is a superbly designed and engineered machine for the rider or racer who wants a deep-rooted, symbiotic connection with their bike. The experience is not as muted as a regular race bike - the steering is more precise, and it requires concentration and confidence to ride at the limit. The frame is also notably stiff but not to the detriment of the overall ride experience.

In terms of rivals, the Ridley Noah Fast 3.0, Cervelo S5 and even the Argon 18 Nitrogen are close competitors with a similar user case, but lose out marginally to the One’s precision and unfettered sense of purity. This alone will either endear it to riders or send them in the opposite direction – as will the £11,309 / $12,199 / €13,399 sticker price, which is on the upper end of the pricing spectrum in this SRAM Force build. Add Red AXS or Shimano Dura-Ace Di2, and it gets even more costly.

During the entirety of the test period and with many other bikes in for evaluation, the Factor One was the bike I kept reaching for and the one I’d always find myself looking at from across the room. This is the effect it has on people – bystanders and riders alike. The expressions and excitement etched across the faces of those seeing Factor One for the first time demonstrate why we desperately need more companies that create and challenge the status quo rather than settle for mediocrity.

Am I sad to give it back? Yes. Do I want one? Of course. Do I have space? No, but I’ll make some. It’s the fastest and most entertaining bike I’ve ridden this year.

Tech spec

• Price: £11,309 / $12,199 / €13,399
• Brand: Factor
• Frame: TeXtreme, Toray, Nippon Graphite with Pan-Based Fibre
• Fork: One Wide Stance Fork
• Weight: 7.9kg (actual, 54cm)
• Sizes: 47, 52, 54, 56, 58cm
• Levers: SRAM Force AXS
• Brakes: SRAM Force AXS, 160/140mm front/rear
• Rear derailleur: SRAM Force AXS
• Front derailleur: SRAM Force AXS
• Crankset: SRAM Force AXS 48/35T
• Bottom bracket: SRAM Dub Press-fit
• Cassette: SRAM Force AXS 10-33T
• Chain: SRAM Flattop, 12-speed
• Wheels: Black Inc 62mm
• Tyres: Continental GP5000 S TR 28mm
• Bar/stem: Factor Integrated Barstem, 38cm
• Seatpost: Factor 30mm setback
• Saddle: Selle Italia SLR Elite

The Rapha Pro Team Ghost Air jersey is the most expensive cycling jersey that I’ve tested. It builds on the previous Ghost jersey with a design specifically suited for humid environments.

Construction

Rapha has developed the Ghost range of kit using climate chambers and laboratories to test the body temperature of riders in the Ghost kit versus other kits. The idea behind this line has been produce a jersey that limits the impact on performance that the heat has. The standard Ghost jersey was designed to be very fast moisture wicking but was not as effective in humid heat. The Ghost Air steps it up when conditions get humid thanks to some clever construction techniques.

Whereas the Ghost jersey sits flush with your skin, the Ghost Air features a series of dotted lines of material under the jersey. These push the fabric away from the skin and allow for airflow between the jersey layer and the skin. With humidity impacting moisture transfer, this improved airflow is designed to help sweat wicking when that becomes near impossible in humidity with standard lightweight materials.

The jersey also features a host of perforation across the entirety of the construction. This is aimed to work in conjunction with the internal channelling to allow for air to enter and circulate, assisting in evaporative heat loss. Rapha does state the jersey is for use in 25-40˚ C and humid conditions, and without a base layer to work at its best.

It also features the same lightweight mesh waist hem as the Ghost jersey, as well as low cut neck and three rear cargo pockets with a mesh structure around them.

Sizes range from XS to XXL, while three standard colours are available as well as a special edition Ice Dye version.

The Ride

To really put the Ghost Air to the test, I’ve made the most of the rather humid heatwaves that we’ve been graced with in the UK so far this summer; 34˚C and 60% humidity isn’t the maximum of what this jersey is claimed to be able to cope with, but it’s a good place to start.

The fit of the jersey is very much in line with the Rapha Pro Team range. The rear sits a bit higher than the Classic range, but the pockets are still manageable to reach into without difficulty. At the front, the hem does sit quite high, so if you have bib shorts with a lower cut at the front like the Assos Equipe RSR then you can end up exposing some skin when standing off the bike. As with other Pro Team items the fit is close and race cut, but not constrictive.

Having previously tested the standard Ghost jersey, the fast moisture wicking was a fantastic feature of that jersey with the very thin material, however it struggled to transfer this moisture when the weather was more humid. Back to back testing of the Ghost Air with that did confirm that the Ghost Air does work significantly better in that stickier humid heat. You can’t escape all levels of discomfort in those conditions, but the Ghost Air jersey does do a very admirable job of reducing how stuffy you feel around your trunk. Having the raised internal structures and host of perforations does assist in allowing air to enter and flow better than any other piece of kit that I’ve tested.

It can still struggle a little on longer, steeper climbs as the airflow becomes a little limited by the reduction in speed. However, at cruising speeds of 25-30kph the jersey works very effectively.

You do need to be careful with the white jersey in terms of colour staining, especially if you have darker bib shorts that are also getting very sweaty. I did end up with some colour patches on the Ghost Air, but they washed off and it was against a new unwashed pair of dark dyed shorts. Just something to consider.

Another feature I do like is the internal perforations do lead to a slight ribbed structure on the sleeves of the jersey. There is no testing to confirm if this improves the aerodynamic performance but, generally speaking, a textured sleeve is faster than a smooth sleeve, so it is unlikely that it hurts performance in any way.

Value

There is no doubt about it, this is a very specialist jersey, and that comes at a price. £275/$350 is very expensive for a cycling jersey. It wasn’t long ago that a pair of bib shorts exceeding £200 was a lot, let alone a jersey that now nears the £300 mark.

To put it into context, other hot weather specialist jerseys are significantly cheaper. The Rapha Ghost standard jersey is £225, Castelli Premio Evo £230, Assos Mille GTO S11 £210, and Isadore Echelon Ultralight is £170. I can’t say that compared to the likes of the Isadore jersey that the Ghost Air offers good value; it simply doesn’t justify being £105 more for most people.

Saying that, having tested a lot of jersey across a lot of conditions, I can confidently say that the Ghost Air is the best at regulating temperature when the conditions are more humid. To that end, it is a class leader, so if you want a jersey that is the best for humid conditions, this is it. But in those conditions, other factors such as head cooling are still a big limitation, and comfort is relative in 40˚C humid heat.

The Rapha Pro Team Ghost Air will be more comfortable than other jerseys in those conditions, but I don’t think it’s by such a margin to justify the cost for most people. But perhaps if I was doing events in hot humid conditions where I was preparing all season for it, then something that makes me cooler, more comfortable, and may enhance performance a touch might become a relatively better value item.

Conclusion

The Rapha Pro Team Ghost Air jersey is a wonderful adventure into what is possible when it comes to creating a jersey specifically for hot and humid conditions. In weather like that, nothing is truly comfortable, but compared to the competition, the Ghost Air does a better job at keeping you cooler for longer thanks to some clever technical innovations with the fabric.

It’s not good value for most of us, as £275/$350 is the price of a good pair of shorts and a decent jersey. But for those who want to be as comfortable as possible in conditions that frankly are extremely uncomfortable, the Ghost Air does a better job than anything else on the market right now.

If you're going to travel on an aeroplane with your bike, you'll want one of the best bike boxes. The care and attention offered by baggage handlers varies, and a dedicated box will always provide more protection than a cardboard box or bubble wrap. However, for most of the year, when not in use, they are big and bulky to store.

You could hire one when required, but that brings its own issues and costs, so if you do travel with your own bike regularly and would like to buy one but are tight on storage space, then the Post Carry Loomer might be the solution.

By the way, the brand’s name comes from the fact that Marc Mendoza, its American founder, started off his sideline bag business ‘post work’, before it became full-time. ‘Loomer’ comes partly from the fact that big, exciting trips loom ahead of you and partly from the 1991 song ‘Loomer’ by My Bloody Valentine, a track about escapism. Certainly a more interesting backstory than most bike box names!

Construction

The cardboard box that the Loomer was delivered in was impressively small (for a bike box anyway). It measured just 115 x 34 x 55cm, making storage of the Loomer between trips much simpler than a full hard case. When collapsed, two sturdy straps keep it compacted, and when not in use they have their own zipped external pocket, which is a nice detail.

I weighed the box at a fraction over 11kg, so similar to Evoc’s Road Bike Bag Pro and a couple of kg less than a Bike Box Alan Aero Easyfit hardshell box.

Unpacking and constructing the box for use was both quick and intuitive. The sides and top panel unfold to reveal a metal frame bolted into the bottom of the box, two padded wheel bags and four polycarbonate panels. These panels slip into zipped compartments on the inside of the sides of the box, creating rigidity and providing protection.

The material used for the outside of the box is very heavy-duty Cordura, so there should be no longevity issues there.

A large, sturdy U-shaped zip secures the top flap, also with some robust-feeling padding, and there are two sleeves for cross-bracing protection at the handlebars and the rear dropouts. Post Carry says that the bag ships with the rear brace (effectively a short section of plastic pipe) but not the longer handlebar piece; however, adding your own is quick and simple. The box is wide enough for 50cm handlebars, which is loads for a road bike, but flared gravel bars might struggle a bit.

On the inside of the box, there are lots of very useful, large pockets, with two on either side, one under the down tube and one in front of the fork. All of these are bellows-style for more room rather than lying flat against the bag and are closed with a zip. There is also a poppered flap at the back which is intended to house your rear derailleur if removed.

The ‘chassis’ is a hard plastic tub, into which the metal frame is bolted, with four wheels, the front two of which steer shopping trolley style.

The Loomer is available in two different sizes to minimise dead space: 333L for size 56cm frames and below, and 370L for larger bikes.

The ride

Packing the box was almost as simple as building it.

With the wheels and seatpost removed, the fork bolts to the internal frame using the thru-axle whilst the bottom bracket shell sits on top of a large, padded block and is secured using a strap. There is a short piece of material to protect the frame from the strap, but it’s not quite long enough, so I also used some foam pipe lagging too.

The rear derailleur can be removed to protect the hanger in transit and put behind the dedicated flap; I also wrapped my chainstay in some more foam pipe lagging and zip-tied my chain to it to stop it from flapping around and damaging the paintwork.

Fortuitously, I found a perfect length piece of pipe in my garage to slot into the handlebar brace sleeve.

I removed my pedals when packing the bike as they are Garmin Rally power pedals with batteries in them, but it would be possible to pack the bike with pedals in place - the padded wheel bags sit either side of the frame towards the front under the handlebars.

Almost as soon as it arrived, the box was pressed into service for two back-to-back trips to Mallorca. The first was a shorter affair, and I only took hand luggage and the Loomer, so the capacious pockets were extremely useful.

As well as the saddle and seatpost, I packed two pairs of shoes, a helmet, a bag of tools, a few bottles and four sets of cycling clothes all in the bag’s pockets with plenty of space to spare. I had hold luggage for the second set of flights, so space was at less of a premium.

However, I did learn that there is a bit of an art to packing the Loomer, as it doesn’t really like having much weight in the large pocket under the downtube that is attached to the metal frame. In Marc’s desire to reduce the Loomer’s size as much as possible, it runs with very little ground clearance, and when the central pocket is heavy, it can cause the bottom of the box to scrape annoyingly on any imperfection. Counterintuitively, it is better to put the weight in the pockets on the side of the box and leave the lowest pocket for light, bulky objects like your bike helmet.

When I mentioned this to Marc, he said that he is aware of the issue and that a solution should be added very soon.

When the bag is not scraping on the ground, the wheels run very freely and steer easily, although, much like the Evoc bag, it prefers to be pulled rather than pushed. With four widely spaced wheels, the box was super stable, and the wide, flat top was ideal for resting my hand luggage on whilst scooting through the airport.

With its short, squat dimensions, the Loomer would be a great option for someone with a smaller car, as it needs much less width than something like a Bike Box Alan. However, its width/depth meant that it wasn’t much easier to pack into my large car with a second box and hold luggage - doable but still awkward.

Value and conclusion

The Loomer costs $900 or €775, with sterling pricing to be confirmed. As bike boxes go, this is about par for the course - cheaper than the Evoc, Scion or Buxumbox boxes, slightly more expensive than Bike Box Alan. It's a chunk of cash for sure, but almost certainly a lot less money than the bike it will be protecting.

It feels well made and has been thoughtfully designed, making it very easy to pack and use without feeling like you need to be a pro mechanic. It’s nice that riders of smaller bikes don’t have to lug about the same size box as those on 62cm frames, and its compact dimensions will be appreciated whether built up or packed away.

I understand that Post Carry were trying to make the box as small as possible, but I think that another centimetre of ground clearance would make it much easier to pack and move around without affecting the size very much at all. However, this doesn’t stop me from recommending the Loomer to anyone travelling with their bike, regardless of whether they need its compactability or not.

It is very close to a 5-star product, but I was cursing it for dragging its underside on the ground on a long walk back to my car at Manchester airport - if/when the ground clearance is sorted, then it will warrant the maximum number of stars.

This is actually the second release of the Nimbl Urano shoes. Previously released in the winter of 2024, after testing and feedback from professionals, Nimbl shelved the shoe so that they could fix some issues. Now, it's back with the Italian brand hoping that the Urano will set the standard for high end gravel race shoes.

Construction

The Urano are built upon the same monocoque carbon fibre sole as the rest of the Nimbl line of shoes. This results in the same incredibly low stack height of around 2mm, with the rear of the sole extending up to create a stiffer heel cup. The main differences are the two-bolt cleat mounting for Shimano SPD cleats, and the inclusion of rubber treads. A TPU toe guard, front and rear treads, and mid-sole protective piece have been added for off-road walking traction and sole protection, a feature you see on many of the best gravel shoes.

As with other Nimbl shoes, retention comes via the two Boa Li2 dials. These allow for micro adjustments for tightening and loosening, with a pull to release system. These are the plastic topped version rather than the metal ones on the Ultimate and Ultimate Glide shoes. A grippy exterior is still included on the dials, in rubber this time, to allow for easy grip and retention adjustments.

On the upper, the structure is the same as the Ultimate shoes, with a conventional tongue design. However, the microfibre upper has been redesigned to be more resilient, and easier to clean given the off-road design of these shoes. For ventilation there are multiple perforations across the sides of the upper material.

A size 43 is quoted as being 254g per shoe, the size 45 on test was 248g per shoe including all the parts and insoles. Sizes range from 39 to 47, with half sizes from 41 up to 47. Black and white colour options are available.

The Ride

In terms of performance, I have been mightily impressed by the Nimbl Urano shoes. Using them on the road with Shimano SPD pedals, the power transfer and light weight has meant the setup feels.as good as the usual Speedplay setup I use for road riding. Power transfer for sprints and higher capacity efforts feels planted and direct, while the low weight does feel better at higher cadences when the shoe is moving faster.

To really test these shoes, I used them for the Gralloch UCI gravel race. They clearly didn’t slow me down, after 3.5 hours of racing I had averaged 291 watts and set plenty of power PBs. In essence, they felt like road racing shoes, providing impressive stiffness as a platform to launch watts from.

Comfort wise, these have taken less breaking in time than the Ultimate Air or Glide shoes I’ve tested. The upper is stiff, but not unforgiving and the low entry to the shoes means there is very little chance of any upper material rubbing on ankles. This low entry also does not result in any lack of retention around the heel. The rear of the shoe cups the heel nicely with a fit that is narrow enough on my heel and ankle, but not constricting.

Of course the Boa Li2 dials play a big part in the retention. I personally prefer the tongue-less design of the Ultimate Glide and I find that dial setup does lead to better pressure distribution when really clamping down the dials. However, on the Urano, the two dial setup with tongue can still be tightened down enough to secure the foot well for most high capacity efforts without being overly tight on any section of the foot. The Boa Li2 dials have been praised enough in many shoe reviews I have done, as well as by others, and remain the standard bearer for retention dials on cycling shoes with both the micro-adjustments for tightening and loosening, as well as the pull to release for easy foot release.

After 3.5 hours of racing, the outside of my right foot was aching, due in part to the stiff carbon sole. I have a high arch, so even with arch support I can get a pressure buildup on the outside of my foot, but after this amount of time on rough terrain, there was certainly some aching.

The main difference between the Urano and the rest of the Nimbl lineup is of course the gravel element of them. The sole uses two two bolt attachment points for Shimano SPD cleats rather than the three or four bolt road options. The upper is also more rugged and easier to clean, with dirt wiping easily off them after a day of racing.

On the sole of the shoe there are also more rugged tread elements for walking off-road and maintaining some grip. These are effective, and have proven useful riding on bridleways and requiring a fair bit of walking in some cases, but these are race shoes and these are not as grippy as more adventure focussed gravel shoes.

There is one glaring issue with these shoes though, and that is the quality of the finish. On the front tread section especially, a good amount of it is visibly glued on, and can be lifted quite easily by hand. It’s not the quality I would expect for a pair of shoes that cost more than half a grand. I have seen far better quality of the tread fitting on shoes that are a third of the price. They appear secure enough, with sections that fit into the sole itself on some small openings, but it’s still a little bit tardy in terms of finish quality.

The insoles are the same basic ones that come with all Nimbl shoes, and I am in two minds when it comes to criticism of these. On the one hand, if you spend £550 on cycling shoes, you are likely performance focussed and use custom orthotics. If you don’t, you should, it’s a far greater performance gain. On the other hand, the insoles that come with the QUOC M3 shoes with adjustable arch are fantastic and I use them instead of the custom insoles I have, as with the high arch support they work well for me. Regardless, with the Nimbl Urano you will likely need to buy insoles, or use whatever pair you already use, as the supplied ones don’t offer much support for anyone with any form of arch in their foot.

Value

As with previous Nimbl shoe reviews, value is an area where the price tag does just mean they struggle comparatively. £550 / $649 is a huge amount to pay for cycling shoes, regardless of how good they are. The simple fact is at this price there is certainly a case of diminishing returns on investment.

I have previously been racing in a pair of Specialized S-Works Recon Lace shoes, which retailed for £300 / $325. They are lightweight, fit well, and offer a great level of power transfer, for nearly half the price. Spending my own money, I could not justify spending £250 more on a pair of shoes for what is a small increase in performance based on statistics.

Even the new S-Works Recon Evo, based on the Ares 2 shoe, are £399 /$549, and feature a broader spectrum of sizes. On the face of it some of the finish of those is slightly better than the Urano as well. However, the more convoluted path of the Boa dial lace is ripe for damage from mud and grit ingress over time.

The new Sidi Aeron is another consideration, again £399 / $570 and carbon soled, dual-dialled, and with good levels of tread. The carbon sole is also less exposed for longevity, but this will add weight even if that figure is not disclosed.

But then this is a high-performance race shoe. Compared to most dual-boa-dial equipped shoes the Urano are around half the weight. That’s often around 500g saving which at a higher performance level is not insignificant. The power transfer is also exceptional, so much so that I can happily use these shoes for fast paced road rides on SPD pedals. For those seeking every advantage, there may be value to them in these shoes. For most of us, I’d say you are far better buying in the £250-300 price point for performance gravel shoes. They will be mostly as good, likely feature greater longevity features, and cost far less.

Conclusion

The Nimbl Urano shoes are quintessentially Nimbl. They are extortionately expensive, exceptionally lightweight, wonderfully stiff, secure and comfortable, and lust worthy in their style and desirability. If you want the fastest gravel racing shoe option for SPD cleats, you’ll likely struggle to do better than these. If you want almost all of that performance but for significantly less cash and potentially greater longevity, look elsewhere.

The gravel category has reached an interesting, and perhaps inevitable, point in its evolution. What began as cycling's answer to the n-1 bike has gradually fractured into a collection of increasingly specialised subcategories. Riders are now routinely asked to choose between aerodynamic race bikes built for podiums and adventure rigs capable of disappearing into the wilderness for days at a time.

Take, for example, the evolution of the Specialized Crux. Once celebrated for its versatility and cyclocross roots, the latest version has evolved into something closer to a fat-tyred Tarmac, prioritising speed, efficiency and aerodynamics above all else. At the opposite end of the spectrum sit slacked-out bikes with suspension forks, mountain bike geometry and huge tyre clearances, to the point where they're often little more than hardtails with drop bars attached.

In specialising, most new gravel bikes have drifted away from the all-round versatility that defined the category in the first place. Yet a handful of brands still seem interested in solving the original gravel equation: building a true all-rounder. Look believes its newest gravel platform, the G85 Cezal, is exactly that.

"The G85 Cezal is a fast and versatile carbon bike designed for all-around gravel rides, bridging the gap between amateur racing and long-distance adventure," says the French manufacturer.

"Amateur racing" is a curious positioning. After all, Look ambassador Russell Finsterwald has spent much of the season racing the G85 Cezal at some of gravel's biggest events, including Unbound Gravel and The Traka. He even opened the year with victory aboard the bike at Belgian Waffle Ride Arizona, so it's clearly at home at the sharp end of modern gravel racing as well.

On paper, the G85 Cezal appears to sit directly between gravel's increasingly polarised identities. It combines progressive geometry, generous tyre clearance and suspension-corrected design with the responsiveness and efficiency traditionally associated with Look's road-racing pedigree. Look has not, however, placed much emphasis on aerodynamics, which are becoming increasingly important across the vast, flatter stretches of Kansas and Girona.

Is there still a place for an all-rounder gravel bike in today's market? I rode the Look G85 Cezal for several weeks across Oregon's fast gravel roads, chunky doubletrack, technical singletrack and long mixed-surface days to find out.

Meet the Cezal

At The Traka and Unbound this year, we witnessed a purposeful move away from versatility in the pursuit of all-out speed. Big tyre clearance is in, yes, but other rider-friendly features such as round seatposts, 2x compatibility, cockpit options, suspension-fork compatibility and even in-frame storage have largely disappeared from the latest race machines, including the Specialized Crux 5, unreleased Factor and Giant prototype.

The G85 Cezal, therefore, stands out because it deliberately leans into versatility. It's also a significant departure from the French brand's previous gravel efforts, which sat decidedly on the road side of the spectrum.

The G85 Cezal arrives with a geometry, feature set and aesthetic that place it firmly within the modern progressive gravel conversation.

There's a slack 70-degree head angle paired with a relatively short wheelbase, a large front triangle with ample storage options, 50mm tyre clearance (57mm in the fork), integrated frame cable routing paired with a semi-integrated cockpit and boatloads of versatility built into the platform.

1x or 2x drivetrains, suspension forks, wireless or mechanical groupsets, a 27.2mm round seatpost, integrated storage and stack and reach figures that accommodate a wide range of cockpit options – the G85 Cezal is yours to configure however you see fit.

"With the G85 Cezal, we wanted to move away from the white lines and marginal gains, returning to why we ride in the first place: expression... This bike doesn't ask you to follow a path or a trend; it adapts to your style, your terrain and your rules," said Romain Simon, Bike Product Manager at Look.

While part of me feels this bike may be two or three years behind the curve, it's refreshing that the Cezal was purposefully not designed for the pointy end of racing and therefore comes with features the average consumer – racer or not – will very much appreciate.

"Early on in my conversations with Look, it became clear they were serious about re-entering the gravel space. The G85 Cezal delivers on that in a big way," said racer Russell Finsterwald. "It checks all the boxes of a modern gravel bike: generous tyre clearance, geometry corrected to accommodate a suspension fork and a racy platform."

Specs:

• UDH compatible
• Internal downtube storage
• Bottom bracket: T47
• Suspension-corrected geometry
• Tyre clearance: 700 x 50 rear, 700 x 57 fork. 45mm in a 2x setup
• Wheels: FULCRUM Soniq Carbon 2WF
• Tyres: Hutchinson Touareg 700X45C
• Seatpost: LOOK LS1 UD Carbon - 27.2mm
• Cockpit: DEDA SuperZero Gravel Alloy & LOOK LS3 stem
• Drivetrain options: The test bike came with a 13-speed SRAM Force AXS XPLR groupset and retails for £6,190 / $7,500. LOOK also offers builds with Shimano's GRX Di2 2x option and GRX 1x mechanical set up. The latter is priced at £3,499 / $4,300. Framesets retail for £2,300 / $2,750.

The Ride

First things first: the G85 Cezal has presence.

The roomy front triangle, rounded lines, purple-speckled paint and contrasting red graphics make it a bike that demands a second look. Personally, I love it. In a sea of increasingly monochrome gravel bikes, the Look feels unapologetically fun.

Secondly, it's respectably light. Despite topping out at a SRAM Force XPLR build rather than the flagship SRAM Red groupset, my test bike tipped the scales at 8.5kg ready to ride, complete with bottle cages.

I rode this bike on all my favourite local loops, as well as a big day in the Columbia Gorge where I battled the infamous headwinds from start to finish. What stood out almost immediately was how at home I felt on the bike.

Half an hour into my first ride, I knew we were going to get along. And that feeling came down largely to the handling.

The Cezal is lively.

In the pursuit of stability, tyre clearance and off-road capability, too many gravel bikes have become muted. They're smooth and competent, certainly, but not always particularly engaging to ride. The G85 Cezal is an exception, and one that I, as a former cyclocrosser, very much appreciate.

The bike accelerates eagerly, carries speed well and responds instantly to rider input. There's a responsiveness that's clearly influenced by Look's road-racing heritage. Yet unlike many road-derived gravel bikes, that responsiveness never comes at the expense of control.

The slacker front end and generous tyre clearance bring confidence once the terrain becomes rougher or the descents more technical. On loose surfaces, the bike remained composed and predictable, but never dull.

What impressed me most was how seamlessly it adapted to whatever ride I asked of it.

It's steady on climbs and efficient on long drags into a headwind. It's controlled on loose surfaces but still playful enough to encourage the occasional singletrack detour. It feels equally comfortable lining up for a gravel race, heading out for an all-day adventure or taking the long way home simply because a trail looks interesting.

In short, it's fun and capable.

And that's a difficult balance to strike. Most bikes excel at one thing and merely tolerate the rest. The Cezal genuinely seems to enjoy all of it.

The versatility of the platform only reinforces that impression. Thanks to the 27.2mm round seatpost, suspension-corrected geometry and generous tyre clearances, riders can tailor the bike to suit their priorities. Racers can keep things relatively lean and efficient, while riders interested in rougher terrain, underbiking adventures or backcountry exploration have plenty of room to experiment.

For those looking to race vast courses like Unbound Gravel, it is important to note that one thing the Cezal doesn't do is chase aerodynamic gains.

There are no aero talking points, no truncated tube profiles and no obvious attempts to squeeze marginal gains from the wind tunnel.

Instead, the emphasis remains firmly on ride quality, handling and versatility. It can race, but it's made for riding.

Whether that's a disadvantage depends entirely on your priorities, but it feels refreshingly confident in a market increasingly focused on optimisation.

Value & Verdict

So is there still a place for an all-rounder gravel bike in today's gravel market?

After several weeks aboard the G85 Cezal, I'd argue there's more need for one than ever. While much of the category has split into increasingly specialised race and adventure machines, the Cezal is a reminder that most riders don't neatly fit into either camp. Most of us simply want a bike that's fun, capable and versatile enough to handle whatever ride we have planned that day.

At $7,500 for the SRAM Force XPLR build tested here, the G85 Cezal is still an investment, but it feels appropriately priced. You'll get a lot of bike for the money, with a decent build.

What makes it so good is its refusal to chase extremes.

It's light and lively without feeling twitchy, stable without feeling dull, fast enough to pin on a race number, versatile enough for an all-day adventure and capable enough to make questionable route choices along the way.

Riders focused purely on racing or, conversely, on multi-day expeditions will find more specialised options elsewhere. But if I were shopping for a new gravel bike tomorrow, the G85 Cezal would be on my shortlist.