I rarely stick with a tyre for long, and almost never use them long enough to wear them out, which is par for the course for someone in my position. However, something about the Hutchinson Touareg HardSkin kept me interested over the last couple of years.

I found it to be a fit-and-forget tyre in its HardSkin casing; you can run it at super-low pressures and really push it into corners; there is always some grip, even when it is clogged with mud; and it is incredibly durable, arguably one of the best gravel bike tyres. It had one major flaw, though: it was incredibly slow.

So, has Hutchinson revitalised this great tyre by giving it a ‘racy’ upgrade? Or has it lost its identity amid the bicycle industry's unrelenting pursuit of 'speed'?

Design details

The Touareg Race shares much of its DNA with the Hutchinson Caracal Race I tested last year, and is also made in France. It uses the well-proven SwiftEasy casing, which is considerably more supple and reduces rolling resistance. Alongside the brand's Mach Tread 3.0 rubber, Hutchinson claims that the changes have increased the Touareg's efficiency by 35%.

That's a hefty number, even when compared to a tyre as slow as the Touareg. A quick fact-check on BicycleRollingResistance.com makes this abundantly clear: The HardSkin costs you nearly 30 watts in the 40mm version, let alone the 45mm I ran. According to BRR, that number is now just 16 watts for the 40mm, which is only 2 watts slower than the Caracal Race, a considerably less knobby tyre.

Available in 40, 45 and 50mm, my 45mm test set weighed 554g/1.2lbs, which is surprisingly 30 grams lighter than the Caracal Race 45mm. The Touareg Race is also offered with Hutchinson’s GridSkin casing. This added protection, found on the brand's road tyres, is said to offer increased ‘bead-to-bead’ protection, at the cost of around 30-40 g per tyre.

Performance

Hutchinson typically makes easy-to-fit tyres, as was the case here. You can thumb them on, and they still feel reassuringly sturdy and well-fitted.

Inflation was just as easy, and I did it with just a floor pump. I found I had to hold the tyre flat at the valve to force the casing against the rim wall, and I needed an additional 4-5 pumps to get it going. This isn’t unusual, and a good reminder to replace my rim tape and valves.

Once inflated to 40psi/2.7 bar, my calipers measured the tyres at 47mm on 25mm internal hookless rims.

As expected, the Touareg Race is considerably faster than the HardSkin version. However, the biggest gains come on fine, hardpack gravel surfaces, where it overlaps considerably with the Caracal Race. Where I'd hoped to see improvement was on much chunkier, looser surfaces. While it is faster than its predecessor, it just doesn’t feel as spritely as the Caracal despite sharing much of the same DNA.

Despite the HardSkin version being a tyre I ran pretty low, I’d settled on the high 30s, around 37/38 psi for the Caracal, which struck a nice balance between speed, grip, and suppleness – and where I decided to start with the Touareg. Like its sibling, I didn’t find the Touareg's sweet spot until I dropped well below 35, closer to 30psi.

Dropping pressure, as expected, increased compliance and, thankfully, speed on looser surfaces. It's always a tread I felt I could really rail, mainly because I knew the HardSkin version wouldn’t fold or puncture; this feeling thankfully returned at lower pressures. It's clear the Touareg just needs to deform more, which I always put down to the HardSkin's tough casing, but it's more about how the tread interacts with the casing.

It's those micro-knobbles that make me believe the Touareg is much more of an intermediate tyre than Hutchinson markets it as, and its crossover with the Caracal is only really in the ‘Race’ branding. I have always believed the Touareg to be a great wet- and mud-tyre. Because the knobs are so small, they rarely pick up much, but what they do pick up clears very quickly, meaning there is always ‘some’ grip.

It's when you point the Touareg uphill and bank it hard into corners that the difference between the two becomes more like night and day, especially on the slimy chalk we have in abundance here on the South Downs , located in South East England. The Touareg rarely lets go, turning hard efforts and big loads into excellent forward momentum regardless of how hard you push it.

During my testing for the Caracal, I got a big tyre slash on a long, hard-packed gravel fire-road section; I put it down to bad luck.

Just as I was penning my thoughts on the Touareg, it happened again. Fairly tame trail, admittedly, with some flint around, but totally flat, fast, and well-trodden, the kind of trail and road you might see in a gravel race. Massive gash in the tyre. So, that's two tyres written off in under 1,000km.

In the past, Hutchinson has offered almost too much durability at the expense of speed; with the Race tyres, they seem to have gone too far the other way. While they do offer the newer Grid Skin version, given I have had maybe one puncture in the last 5 years or more, and two on similar tyres in quick succession, I have to pin it on Hutchinson.

Value

Of course, the Touareg is now much faster; while the Caracal is still the faster, more spritely tyre, the Touareg is more consistent and, in my opinion, still one of the best all-round gravel tyres. It also thankfully retains its ability to be pushed hard and ridden more like a mountain-bike tyre than a gravel one.

My big takeaway comes from Hutchinson marketing, which says, “The Touareg Race is the cornerstone of the 'Ultimate Combo', when paired with a Caracal Race at the rear.” Tyre mismatching is very common in mountain biking, and I discussed it briefly in my Caracal review after getting that near-ride-ending puncture.

That was more about optimising protection versus speed, but my time on the Caracal and now the Touareg Race is really starting to make me think, and something I’m going to dedicate some time to testing over the winter.

Cost-wise, Hutchinson continues to undercut its competitors and the big players in the market by maintaining its £55/€60 price point across its Race-branded tyres. US pricing is unconfirmed at the time of writing, but direct currency conversions suggest it will remain a bargain across the pond, if you can get hold of some.

However, a tyre is only good value if it's durable and can outlast or last as long as the more expensive options. Unfortunately, Hutchinson's Race format tyre doesn't seem to be cutting the mustard. I was ready to give the Touareg a 4.5-star rating, but I had to reduce it for this reason.

Tech specs

• Price: £55
• Size: 700 x 45mm
• Weight: 554g/2.1oz (on my scales)
• TPI: 127
• Compound: Mach Tread 3.0
• Sidewall: Tan, Black

Basso Bikes is not, as you might reasonably think, owned by Ivan Basso (who has his own Aurum bike brand with Alberto Contador); rather, it was started by engineer and cyclist Alcide Basso in Italy in 1977. Today, the brand offers a compact range of Italian-made road, gravel and electric bikes.

The Palta II is its premium gravel bike, available in the UK with Campagnolo Record X, Shimano GRX or GRX Di2 and the SRAM Force XPLR AXS-equipped version that I had on test.

Having just enjoyed a month or two riding Handsling’s A1R0evoG gravel bike with similar spec, I was looking forward to seeing how the Italian bike compared on my home terrain of the Peak District.

Design details

The Palta III (not to be confused with the cheaper Palta) is a nice-looking bike. With deep carbon wheels, full-height seatstays, one-piece handlebar and classy-looking paint job, it looks fast even when just leaning against a wall.

At first glance, the carbon frame looks fairly standard, but on closer inspection, some angular, even triangular, shapes are evident; Basso calls them ‘diamond-shaped’. The seat tube and down tube both have slightly cut-out sections for the wheels, similar to the original Cervelo Aspero, and the top tube widens and flattens towards the head tube. The fork's forward-hunched stance also adds to the Palta’s aggressive aesthetic.

The Palta III’s frame borrows tech and design from Basso’s road bikes, with a reduced frontal area for less drag and increased torsional stiffness around the bottom bracket for better power transfer. The frame isn’t only fast, though; Basso says a size medium weighs just 970g.

The in-frame storage is one of the neatest and most integrated I’ve seen, with a subtle Fidlock magnetic latch fastening the hatch over the internal compartment. If you need to carry more luggage, it has top-tube mounts, down-tube mounts, and even three mounts on the underside of the top tube. It has no fork mounts, but the frame has the most OTT down-tube protector I’ve ever seen: a chunky rubber number made by Vibram, the walking-boot-sole manufacturer.

Tyre clearance is a healthy but not class-leading 50mm, and there is potential to mount a front derailleur, although there are no 2x models available in the UK.

Sizes run from XS to XXL with three colour options: Purple Dust, Galaxy Dream and Carbon Chrome, or beige, green and black to you and me.

Specifications

Bolted onto and into the carbon frame is an array of rather nice components, all very much in keeping with the Palta III’s rapid character.

I’ve used SRAM’s dedicated gravel 1x Force XPLR groupset on a few bikes, and it never fails to impress. The levers are fantastically ergonomic, and with 13 sprockets on the wide 10-46T cassette, the jumps aren’t too bad, especially lower down the range. The frame is UDH-compatible.

At just over 1,500g and under 50mm deep, Miche’s Graff Aero 48 wheels looked the business and promised drag reduction if I ever reached the necessary speed. Talking of which, the Schwalbe G-One R TLR tyres were also aimed at dry trail speed rather than grip in mud. I had no issues with the hookless rims and these tyres, but I have previously had problems with hookless rims at low pressures, so I was a bit wary of them.

Basso offers two handlebar options: a two-piece setup or a one-piece aero design. The test bike had the latter, in an incredibly narrow width – 37cm centre-to-centre and 33cm at the hoods, with not much flare at the drops and a stem 110mm long. This is a standard size, but you could perhaps switch it at the point of purchase.

Comfort comes in the form of an interesting seatpost clamp design, which includes a vulcanised rubber piece down the back of the seatpost as part of the clamp called the '3B Clamp System Gen II'. I was less impressed, though, to see that the two seatpost clamp bolts are tiny 3mm hex bolts and sit right in the line of fire from mud spray from the back wheel. Good luck not rounding those off when they are full of dirt – a strip of gaffer tape over them would be my first modification if it were mine.

The seatpost has a unique shape, deeply concave at the rear (where the 3B Clamp System fits) and round at the front.

Basso says that the stack has been raised and the reach reduced from the previous iteration, and the geometry figures seem to back this up. The 370mm reach and 570mm stack on the size medium are certainly at the shorter/higher end of the scale compared with many gravel bikes, especially speed-orientated ones. The back end is also a bit longer than the norm at 430mm, and the head tube is on the slack side for a gravel bike at 70°.

Performance

Given the Palta III’s set-up and spec, it was handy that my tenure coincided with such a warm, dry summer - the Schwalbe G-One R tyres might not have been so happy in autumn slop - and I enjoyed lots of fast, dusty miles on the bike.

My first thought about the bike was its speed, followed pretty quickly by its stiffness. Coming straight from the super-comfy Handsling A1R0evoG, the Basso’s rigidity stood out. This was more apparent at the front end than the rear, probably not helped by the narrow one-piece bars. Smooth trails were fine, but as the stones got larger, above kiwi fruit-sized perhaps, the ride became less comfortable.

A lot of my ‘gravel’ riding involves plenty of roots, rocks and other trail obstacles arguably better suited to a mountain bike, and here the Basso did struggle to provide as much compliance as I would have liked. I think this comes down to a few things: the 45mm Schwalbe tyres actually only measured 43mm, narrower bars naturally offer less flex than wider ones, and the frame/fork are tuned more for speed than comfort. Even with the tyres running at rim-threatening pressures, many impacts were transmitted through the bike to me.

The 3B Clamp System and long seatpost do work to an extent, but only when seated, and of course rough terrain and techy descents are often tackled standing up.

Interestingly, the test bike was a size Medium, whereas i would usually expect to be a size Large/56. This meant that the stack and bar height was actually pretty good for me (whereas a Large would be too high), but the reach did feel a bit short even with the 110mm stem. This is neither good nor bad, but it is worth being aware that the Palta III does fit slightly differently to some other gravel race bikes.

After 400km+ on the bike, I enjoyed the speed and responsiveness, but I was never tempted to load it up and head off on a multi-day adventure. Instead, it was better suited to shorter bursts, where its directness was acceptable and its stiffness a benefit, especially when climbing. It would have been interesting to try it with some bigger tyres to see how much compliance they added, but I had nothing suitable available.

Value

With the Palta III overlapping with the Handsling A1R0evoG in my garage, and both bikes aimed more at speed than adventure, they made for an interesting comparison.

The long, low Handsling blended pace and compliance well, whereas the Basso leaned more toward outright stiffness despite its more upright fit. With both bikes retailing for around £6,000 in similar spec and weighing just over 8kg, the choice comes down to sizing and ride characteristics.

The price spread for Force XPLR-equipped bikes is wide: the Canyon Grail is £4,799/$5,000, while the Cervelo Aspero-5 is £7,000/$9,000, putting the Italian-made Basso in the mid-pack.

Despite the multiple luggage mounts and Basso’s talk of versatility, the Palta III isn't a bike for long-distance epics carrying all your worldly goods. The ride is too stiff and speed-orientated (and there is barely any room between the hoods for a bar bag). It's better suited to short, fast outings, where you can relish the unfiltered ride.

It is a lovely-looking bike with good components and a brilliant groupset, and a great history behind the brand. If the geometry suits you and you want an outright speed machine, this might be it.

Tech spec

• Price: £5,999/$6,995
• Brand: Basso
• Frame: Palta III carbon
• Fork: Palta III carbon
• Sizes: XS, S, M, L, XL, XXL
• Weight: 8.44kg (actual, medium)
• Groupset: SRAM Force XPLR AXS E1 13-speed
• Crankset: SRAM Force XPLR AXS 40T, 170mm
• Cassette: SRAM Force XPLR 13-speed 10-46T
• Wheels: Miche Graff Aero 48 Tubeless
• Tyres: Schwalbe G-One R TLR Folding 700x45c
• Brakes: SRAM Force AXS hydraulic
• Bar/stem: Fuga Carbon integrated 370mm/110mm
• Seatpost: Basso 15mm layback
• Saddle: Prologo Dimension RS

No. 6 is a Chinese brand that has gained popularity over the last few years due to its growing reputation for making lightweight carbon wheels that, in independent testing, have been found to be on par with some halo offerings from well-established European and US companies.

Design details

The No. 6 G45R (R for race) is the brand's lightest gravel bike wheelset, part of its ProjectSpeed, which aims to make light, fast-accelerating, responsive wheelsets. Unlike the G45W (W for wide), these feature a narrower rim profile to shave off as much weight as possible.

The rims are hooked, made from Toray T700 and T800 carbon fibre, with a unidirectional glossy finish similar to the Campagnolo C-Lux finish. Both measure 45mm deep, but the front is 34.5mm wide externally and 28mm internally, while the rear is 33mm wide externally and 26mm internally. The claimed weight is 1,195g, and the scales of truth match this closely at 1,198g with rim tape, but no valves or lockrings.

The narrower rim relative to the 'W' offering reduces rotational mass, making the wheels more responsive to acceleration, changes in direction, and braking. This design philosophy continues into the carbon-fibre spokes. The rear spokes are wider at 5mm and are claimed to be more aerodynamic, while the front are still bladed but narrower at 3.8mm. The front uses just 16 spokes in a one-cross 1:1 pattern (eight on either side), while the rear uses 20 spokes in a two-cross 1:1 pattern. Spoke nipples are external for ease of adjustment and made of an aerotitanium alloy.

The hubs are No.6’s own Zero Gravity v.3, featuring a 45-tooth ratchet engagement system, Tripeak ceramic bearings, and compatibility with all Shimano, SRAM, and Campagnolo hub types.

No.6 claims optimal tyre widths of 40-50mm, while the maximum rider weight is 110kg and max. pressure is 110 PSI. Black, white, silver, and holographic decals are available.

Performance

The wheels come with valves, lockrings, and pre-taped rims, and the taping quality is good. I fitted a pair of Pirelli Cinturato Gravel M tyres for testing, in both 50mm and 45mm options. These are tougher tyres to fit, but that is not on the rims. A lever easily slotted the tyres on and the wheels were good to go.

A brief word on rim width, as this is fairly subjective. Both wider and narrower rims have pros and cons. In terms of aero performance with 50mm tyres, the 34.5mm external width is probably narrower than optimal for watt savings. But there are a few potential benefits. Firstly, fitting tyres can be a little easier with a narrow rim, as you have less distance to get the second tyre bead on. Next, at low pressures on wider tyres, if you have wider rims, there is potentially more chance of a rim strike, so reinforcements need to be made. Finally, narrower rims without the required reinforcement are lighter, and on gravel in particular, where speeds are lower and inertial force is harder to overcome, this can be more beneficial when accelerating, especially up climbs.

As I said, this is all very subjective, but I've enjoyed the performance on the No. 6 wheels, even if the aero benefits at the average speed I raced the Gralloch UCI gravel race at are negligible (just over 32km/h).

What I did find is that, for climbing, they are frankly dreamy. From sustained-pace efforts to the starting climb at The Gralloch, they changed speed rapidly, a trait I really like in bunch events like this. The low weight also means more responsive braking and direction changes, which, on technical sections and fast descents into tight corners, proved a brilliant combination. The hub engagement also helps with acceleration, with the 45t ratchet quick to respond and with no give.

I can’t comment on the performance gain of the ceramic bearings or the subjective ‘feel’ of the aero performance, but I can say these wheels are no slouch; tellingly, they roll fast on the road, too. Off-road, tyres make the biggest difference to speed, on tarmac, they play a part but the reduced rolling resistance swings the scales in favour of aero performance and hub rolling. I actually spoke with some of the DAS Hutchinson team and a few of them have used the G45R wheelset as a road race wheel option with wider road tyres. Again, from rim to rim, even at race speeds, the differences are usually a handful of single-digit watts, and they depend on the frame. All I can say is that these wheels ‘feel’ like they perform at a comparable level to other high-end offerings I've ridden, including Scope, Black Inc, Enve and DT Swiss.

I'm far less fond of carbon spokes. I find these somewhat superfluous on road wheels, as they are stiff in some directions but not as strong in others, like torsional forces. On gravel, they just don't make sense, given their lack of resilience against side impacts. On the road, this is rare; on gravel, stones regularly fly up into spokes. I suffered a stone strike at The Gralloch, which caused a splinter to come off one of the spokes. No.6 do supply spare spokes for both front and rear, with no need to remove tyres and rim tape to fit, but, as a rule, carbon spokes for gravel wheels are not something I think is needed. Alloy spokes perform brilliantly and are more durable.

Value

Certainly, $2,199 isn't cheap for a wheelset, and for a Chinese wheelset, it’s significantly higher than it has traditionally been. Those worried about Chinese wheels not being made to the same standard as ‘European and US’ wheelsets need not worry, however, given that the majority of carbon wheels from those brands are made in Asia. The main differences are marketing budget and occasional quality control, but the No.6 wheels run true and have a better finish and roundness than some big-brand wheels I have tested.

However, with the ceramic bearings, 45T engagement, carbon spokes, and a CFD-designed rim that has performed well in independent testing, these wheels are taking on the likes of the Enve G SES 4.5 Pro (£3500 /$3300), Scope Artech 4.G (£3,500 / $4,398), and Roval Terra CLX Aero (£2998 / $3400). Compared with these options, the No.6 wheels offer good value.

Of course, import taxes are an issue, as European dealers are currently limited. However, customer care and service are impressive, with spares easy to purchase and supply. But at this price, the Hunt Limitless 40 UD spoke wheels, which are similarly specified and priced at £2,449, might be a more attractive offer to UK customers at the moment, given Hunt’s proven customer care and service. However, those wheels are shallower and heavier, and are hookless only.

Personally, I have no qualms with purchasing wheels from China. The quality and finish of the No.6 wheels have been superb; the performance matches any top-of-the-range offering, and the customer care has been great. ]

So, are these wheels good value? Yes, compared to the high-end performers they compete against. However, they aren't cheap and still represent a large investment for a set of wheels. You can get similar performance for less.

Tech spec

• Price: £1,699 / $2,199
• Weight: 1,195g
• Hubset: Zero Gravity v.3
• Freehub options: Shimano HG11/12, SRAM XDR, Campagnolo
• Rim depth: 45mm
• Spoke count: 16/20 front/rear
• Rim: Hooked

The Sidi Aeron shoes are the latest high-end off-road race option in the Sidi lineup, featuring the new, updated Millennium fit system that widens the toe box and straightens the last for a better fit on most feet. It still keeps some of the modular look Sidi has used for the past few decades, but it's more refined with the new Nuun 001C dials and a sleeker silhouette.

Sidi’s famous heel adjustment system remains, but new materials such as the no-stretch Firmor X are designed to offer enhanced stiffness alongside the improved fit. Combine that with a carbon-fibre sole and high levels of breathability, and this is a shoe designed to excel in fast-paced, high-intensity off-road scenarios.

To find out how good a gravel shoe this is, I’ve racked up over 1,000km off-road from forest trails to canal towpaths, to really put them through their paces.

Design details

The Sidi Aeron shoes are a high-end gravel race shoe built upon a carbon-fibre sole with Sidi’s own Firmor X material, which is designed to provide support through its lack of stretch, similar to Dyneema.

The shoe features a conventional tongue design, but the retention cable runs through the upper section. The retention dials are the new Nuun 001C dials from Sidi, now used across the entire range of its higher-end shoes.

Three standard colours are available, with this white option, black, and an orange and black version. A lilac-and-fluoro-yellow special edition is also available for a slight price increase.

Size-wise, the Sidi Aeron has a fairly expansive 36-48 size range with half sizes all the way up to 46.5.

Design-wise, the shoe still features some of that more modular look Sidi used to have with the Ergo, Wire, and Shot range. However, fewer parts are now removable or replaceable, though the rear heel adjustment system is, and the stud treads on the sole can be, too.

Specifications

The biggest change to Sidi shoes over the last two years is the introduction of the Millennium fit. This replaces the old long, narrow last with a slightly curved last that previous Sidi shoes featured, widens the toe box, straightens the last, and moves the cleat mounting plate further back on the shoe. This follows the design trend of nearly every major cycling shoe manufacturer over the last few years, with Sidi among the last to adopt it.

With this shift in design methodology, the brand has also undergone a drastic design change. Previously, Sidi shoes featured many removable and replaceable parts, whereas now these have been trimmed down to reduce weight across the ranges. Customizable elements remain, with the upper retention fitment having three attachment points, while the ankle retention system remains but has been significantly slimmed down.

The dials have been completely overhauled to the same Nuun 001C used on the Sidi Shot 3 shoes, which are now lighter and also sturdy, hence their use by Nasa apparently. These dials tighten by turning clockwise, rather than towards the exterior of each shoe individually, while a push-to-release system loosens them. These shoes feature two dials for upper and lower foot adjustments.

Inside a fairly basic insole is provided which is lightweight but rather flat without any arch support.

Externally, the shoe features a mesh-like structure for greater breathability, but the Firmor X fabric running through it prevents the panels from stretching. Combined with the stiff carbon fibre sole, the shoes are designed to offer the highest level of stiffness in Sidi’s off-road range. The external tread and removable toe studs provide security when walking over muddy terrain.

Performance

Wearing the Sidi Aeron shoes, the Millennium last is a huge improvement over the previous one. I had this with the Sidi Shot 3 as well, but I personally prefer the Aeron's retention system, with the dials on the side of the foot rather than on the tongue. However, you need to adjust the tongue into the correct position; otherwise, the internal wire mounting point can put uncomfortable pressure on the inside of your foot. In terms of toe-box room, however, it was fantastic, better than Shimano Wide-Fit and on par with Nimbl, Quoc, and Q36.5.

The most impressive thing I have found about these shoes is their overall stiffness. The soles are incredibly stiff and transfer power well. I used these shoes with the WolfTooth DEL pedals, and the tread on the Aeron was the correct height to make use of the high contact patch on the pedals. When stamping down on them, the power transfer was direct, which I can attest to with various Strava KOMs gained across testing loops.

On top of that, the Firmor X upper strands do a great job supporting the upper structure, so there is limited material flex across the top of the shoe. This was a slight issue with the Shot 3, but still far better than the Shot 2S. The biggest improvement is the dials, which clamp down on the foot fantastically without needing to over-tighten them. The tabs are easy to operate, even off-road with jarring ride surfaces. I also appreciate being able to flick them up or down, and I hope they'll last longer than other dial options. One issue, however, is that turning clockwise to tighten the right shoe is fine; on the left shoe, it feels counterintuitive. Most dials, such as Boa, rotate externally to tighten. There is also no micro-adjustment for loosening, instead a push to release system. This is, however, great for getting your foot in and out of the shoe easily, as the opening is large.

I did, however, find the ankle adjustment somewhat superfluous for me. I have a narrow ankle/heel, and the Specialized S-Works 6, with its notoriously narrow heel, fit me perfectly. With the Sidi Aeron, I didn’t need the adjustment, which, to be fair, is a testament to the retention system.

I also thought the insole was a bit cheap. I’m in two minds here, as Nimbl also offers a very basic insole, and I think if you spend over £300 on a shoe, custom insoles will offer a bigger performance gain. But then Shimano and QUOC offer brilliant customisable insoles at the point of purchase with adjustable arch support. Specialized meanwhile offers different insoles, but no option to choose at the point of purchase, annoyingly.

I also have to say these shoes are heavier than I'd like for a high-end gravel race shoe. 407g for a size 45 is not bad, especially with the tread required on the outsole, but the Fizik Ferox 2 are 342g in the same size, while the Nimbl Urano are an insane 248g. When racing, accelerating, and riding at higher cadences, a 150g difference at the point of rotation is noticeable. For more casual riding, it isn’t, but then these are race shoes. However, the Sidi Aeron is more durable than the Urano shoes, which I would personally save only for race days.

Value

At £349, the Sidi Aeron is a premium gravel shoe. That’s to be expected with the carbon-fibre sole and other high-performance features. This is far cheaper than the Nimbl Urano (£550) and the Specialized S-Works Recon Evo (£399.99). However, the Fizik Ferox 2 are cheaper at £319.99, while the Specialized S-Works Recon SL are also £350 and claimed to be a fair bit lighter.

From testing, I can confirm the Fizik Ferox 2 are a bit more comfortable, although the total system stiffness might lean toward the Sidi Aeron. However, the S-Works Recon SL are similar at that level and a fair bit lighter. I personally prefer their fit too, but the varus wedge works well for my foot; it won’t for everyone.

Honestly, system weight is the main deterrent from a gravel-race perspective. Those races have a strong bunch-racing element, where accelerations count, and they also tend to have a lot of elevation gain for the distance in UK events such as Gralloch and Graean. Where the Sidi Aeron have really impressed me is the comfort over longer durations and when doing more ’Fastest Known Time’ style rides where the pace is more consistent.

Although stiff, they don't lack comfort, which can be difficult with gravel shoes, in my experience. I'd personally opt for something like the Sidi Dominator X, which has a carbon sole, a similar retention setup, the same last, and costs £226.

Tech spec

• Price: £349 / €399 / $569.99
• Sole: Carbon
• Sizes: 38-48 (half sizes 38.5-46.6)
• Weight: 407g per shoe (size 45)
• Retention: Dual dials
• Colours: Three (plus Coffee Grinder special edition)
• Cleat mounting: Two-bolt

Scoring notes

Design and aesthetics 9/10

I personally prefer the sleeker less modular design of these over previous Sidi shoes, while the colour palette is a good mix and impressively easy to clean mud off of.

Fit 9/10

The new Millennium fit is a huge improvement over previous Sidi fits. It’s accommodating but not so big as to leave excess wiggle room. The heel adjustment works well but wasn’t really needed for me personally. Insoles are a bit basic though.

Performance 10/10

When it comes to power transfer these shoes are excellent, perhaps not as locked in as the Nimbl Urano, but brilliant by comparison to most competitors. A more reward cleat fitting allows a better power generating fit personally as well.

Weight 6/10
This is where the shoes struggle a bit, as they are heavy compared to other similar specification gravel race shoes. It’s not just a small weight penalty either, it’s a significant one that is perceivable in race efforts.

Value 7/10

These are expensive shoes and unfortunately do not offer the greatest value with the higher weight. There are similar performing shoes for less, or slightly less stiff shoes for a significant reduction in price.

Total
42/50

Handsling is a small, relatively new British brand with an impressive palmarès, thanks to its sponsorship of two race teams. Founded in 2010 by ex-racer Simon Whiten, Handsling provides the bikes and support for the Jakaroo Handsling elite men’s team and the UCI Continental women’s team, Handsling Alba Development.

I was very impressed with the A1R0evoS road bike last year, so I was excited to try the A1R0evoG gravel bike over the summer.

A big part of the Handsling appeal is the ability to completely customise the bikes in terms of components, sizes and colours. You can do this on the website, by phone or email, or even by visiting their Hampshire premises. Being able to choose a longer stem, bigger cassette and shorter cranks, for example, is something that many of the bigger brands still don’t offer, whilst the huge choice of colours available enables you to make the bike a little more personal. It’s a bit shallow, I know, but I wouldn't relish spending many thousands of pounds on one of the best gravel bikes only to find three identical-looking ones outside the café on a Sunday morning.

I spent some time communicating with Rob at Handsling when speccing the test bike and choosing the paint job, but all the choices were ultimately mine, so anything that I didn’t like was totally my fault – a great service but also a good way to avoid criticism about the spec!

Design details

I’m unlikely to ever get complimented on my good looks, dress sense, or cycling ability, but every ride on the A1R0evoG garnered envious looks and words of admiration. The matte ‘Techno Violet’ paint flipped from deep purple to green to blue, then back again, depending on how the light hit it, and it even looked superb after a ride, covered in dust. It’s a £300 option, but so worth it.

The T800 carbon frame weighs just 880g (claimed, size 52) and wouldn’t look out of place on the start line of a road race. At a glance, it resembles the A1R0evoS, with deep forks, dropped seatstays, one-piece bars, and an aero cutout in the seat tube, but it has key design differences.

Tyre clearance is a modern 55mm for starters, and a round seatpost allows you to fit a dropper post. Multiple mounting points let you load it up and head for the hills, though you may need to supply your own bolts, as many use lightweight rubber blanks instead. It even has hidden mudguard mounts, but it offers no in-frame storage, which is fine by me but will be rued by others.

There are six frame sizes available, from 50cm to 60cm, with a plethora of colour and specification options.

Specifications

I chose SRAM’s Force XPLR AXS E1 13-speed groupset with a 10-46T cassette. I wanted a 38T chainring to help me on the steep local hills, but due to temporary supply issues, I had to push a bit harder on a 42T ring. There is a mount for a 2x drivetrain, and the frame uses a threaded T47 bottom bracket.

Handsling suggested I try the Parcours FKT carbon wheelset, a popular option from a British brand that looked superb on the A1R0evo’s frame and promised both performance and comfort. These were shod, quite presciently given the winter order date and heatwave review period, with Vittoria’s fast-rolling Terreno T50 tyres in 50mm width – lovely, supple tyres, but I wouldn’t choose them as a year-round option, and even after 500km there was noticeably less tread left.

Handsling doesn't offer gravel-specific handlebar options, so the off-road bike uses the same bars as the road bike: a one-piece unit with a standard road shape and no flare. I went for a setup slightly shorter and wider than my road bike, with a 100mm stem and 40cm-wide bars, still quite aggressive for a gravel bike, but one I thought would suit its character.

A round, 27.2mm carbon seatpost and a Selle Italia Flight Superflow Boost kept my bum from scraping on the back wheel.

It is, of course, slacker than the road-going A1R0evoS, but the reach and stack figures are not too dissimilar at 393mm and 570mm respectively for a size 56. The wheelbase is 47mm longer thanks to the lengthier chainstays and 72-degree head tube. This is clearly a bike that is made to blend speed and stability.

One thing worth noting is that the top tube is pretty horizontal, meaning there isn't much standover height if you need it. I think I had less seatpost showing on the A1R0evoG than on any bike I can think of, and I am toward the top end height-wise for that frame size.

The weight of the 56cm test bike came in at 8.4kg.

Performance

Let’s not beat around the bush – I loved riding this bike. Ride after ride, I kept waiting for an Achilles' heel, but in over 500km I didn’t find one. I used it for high-speed blasts, long days out and even an overnight trip with a full complement of luggage, and it always felt sublime.

The overwhelming feeling was that the bike was superbly balanced, which gave me huge confidence at speed or when the trails got techy. It was fast too, everywhere. Tarmac was easy thanks to the aggressive position (and lightly treaded tyres), while rocky drops and other MTB-esque features were dispatched with ease. Even horrible, steep climbs felt a touch easier, despite the too-large chainring.

I found the combination of SRAM’s Force XPLR levers and Handsling’s Integrated Race Handlebar very comfortable, even without gloves, but I get that some riders prefer a wider, more flared handlebar and/or the option to fit a suspension stem. In truth, though, I only thought about the bar width in super slow, very technical sections, when a little more width would have increased control. Everywhere else, I loved the racy feel it added. Anyway, a quick pre-build phone call to Handsling could no doubt come up with other options.

In fact, the only ‘issue’ I had with the bike out on the trails was with the FKT wheels. They looked and felt fantastic to ride, but on three separate occasions I suffered a rapid loss of air, which I can only put down to a quick burp from the hookless interface between the rim and the tyre. On all three instances, the tyres held air again when re-inflated, with no evidence of sealant escape. The 47mm deep rims and large 50mm tyres also caught the wind a little, with a side profile of over 100mm.

In the workshop, as with the A1R0evoS, Handsling has used a wide variety of hex bolts on the bike, which is a little frustrating, including my pet peeve: 3mm bolts. These are only on the bottle cages, though, and are easy to replace. I also found accessing the seatpost bolt a bit awkward, as it is situated on top of the top tube but close to the post itself. So I had to force my torque wrench at a slight angle, and it didn’t always sit nicely in the bolt hole, leaving it slightly chewed; an extension or better skills on my part would have prevented this.

Overall, the fast frame, large volume tyres and aggressive set-up felt absolutely perfect on all my local Peak District trails, with astonishing comfort and prodigious speed. I used to think that my personal Cannondale Topstone was the perfect gravel bike for my riding, but now I know that the A1R0evoG is.

Value

As specced with SRAM Force XLPR AXS and Parcours FKT wheels, the test bike cost £6,038. That's a lot of money for any bike, but especially one likely to take a beating off-road. That aside though, the A1R0evoG does offer decent value against its similarly specced rivals, although there is a very wide range of prices for Force AXS-equipped gravel bikes: The Specialized Diverge 4 Pro is £1,000 more, as is the Cervelo Aspero 5 Force, yet the Canyon Grail with Force is only £4,649, so the as-tested Handsling sits roughly mid-pack.

However, the base A1R0evoG Force AXS gravel bike starts at a very reasonable £4,799, with options such as better wheels and fancy paint pushing the price up. Even at the lowest price, you still get complete control over things like bar width and crank length, which I think is a very valuable (yet no-cost) service provided by Handsling.

I’d like to see a little more uniformity in terms of bolt sizes used, and some form of protection provided for the gorgeous paintwork (although Simon Whiten did explain to me that any form of protection would add an extra 4-6 weeks to the build time, as the sprayed-to-order frames take that long to be cured enough for protection to be applied).

The beautifully balanced ride-feel on its own made the test bike feel well worth the cash, though, let alone customisable options and spec.

Tech specs

• Price: £6,037.99
• Frame: Handsling A1R0evoG
• Size: 56cm (Large)
• Weight: 8.4kg
• Groupset: SRAM Force XPLR AXS
• Crankset: SRAM Force XPLR AXS 42T, 170mm
• Cassette: SRAM Force XPLR 13-speed 10-46T
• Wheels: Parcours FKT 47mm
• Tyres: Vittoria Terreno T50 50mm tubeless
• Brakes: SRAM Force eTap AXS hydraulic
• Bar/stem: Handsling Integrated Race Handlebar 400mm x 100mm
• Seatpost: Handsling carbon 27.2mm
• Saddle: Selle Italia Flight Superflow Boost

For years, the bicycle industry has overemphasised the need for the best kids' bikes to be as light as possible – myself included, who, for a time, was part of the team that put together the Hoy-branded Kids Bike range. With even the most affordable kids' bikes now considered reasonably light, have geometry and touchpoints been overlooked?

That's why for my son's first pedal bike, I put geometry first, and I don’t regret it for a minute. His Prevelo Zulu One has set him up perfectly on the pedals and filled him with confidence, culminating in a trip to the Forest of Dean, a mountain-bike haven on the Welsh-English border.

But alas, why do kids grow so fast? Just over a year after getting the Prevelo, he was ready for bigger wheels, and it makes our shotgun adventures seem like a lifetime ago.

So when I saw that Early Rider had updated the geometry of their Seeker 16, and given the brand's reputation for making lightweight kids’ bikes, I knew we needed to put it to the test.

Design details

The latest version of the Early Rider Seeker 16 is once again constructed from a 6061 aluminium frame and fork, which features new dropouts able to accommodate thru-axles; these allow better wheel retention and alignment with the disc brakes when tensioning the single-speed chain and gear.

The biggest change is the bike's geometry: Early Rider has lowered the bottom bracket by 20mm, slackened the head angle by 1.5 degrees from 69.5 to 67, and shortened the seat tube, resulting in a dramatic 40mm drop in standover height. Early Rider claims this should increase stability and make you feel more part of the bike rather than perched atop it.

Aesthetically, while Early Rider has recently introduced more colour, they have stayed true to their roots by continuing to offer the brushed finish we tested alongside 3 new colour-accented designs

Unboxing and assembly

I always like to discuss how kids’ bikes come assembled, as while many reading this might be cyclists, not all parents are, and I think it's helpful, especially when buying direct online. The good news is that the Seeker comes pretty much ready to ride out of the box.

Final setup still requires some parent input, though. Early Rider requires parents to fit the handlebar, align the stem, screw in the pedals, and, if needed, shorten the brake lever reach.

That wasn’t a problem for me, but if you're unsure, Early Rider provides a video to follow and printable instructions if needed. If you're unsure, your local bike shop should charge only £35/$50 to build the bike for you.

The only issue I had was that the handlebar was missing a centring logo, so I had to get the tape measure out. I tend to do this anyway, after losing faith many years ago that those logos were actually in the middle.

Specifications

The Seeker 16 comes with a raft of ‘kids-specific’ in-house Early Rider-branded components, as you might expect. Clearly, a lot of thought has gone into the sizing: the stem is a short 35mm, and the narrow 500mm handlebar uses the 31.8mm standard, making changes or room for growth later much easier.

There are shorter crank arms that work in tandem with the lowered bottom bracket, reducing the length from 110mm to just 90mm. The brand has swapped from Vee Tire Crown Gem, a fairly aggressive MTB tyre for a kids bike, to the new Kenda Booster 16 x 2.2in tyre, which looks to offer a better balance of rolling resistance and grip. Early Rider has even scaled up the hydraulic disc brake rotors, matching the powerful reach-adjustable stoppers with 140mm discs.

Given the undeniable premium of the Seeker range, many will be glad to know (especially for those looking to hold on to them as hand-me-downs) that Early Rider has also made smart choices to maximise the longevity of these parts. For example, the wheels feature sealed bearings, as does the bottom bracket. There are tough double-walled alloy rims, and the bike comes equipped out of the box with a very nice set of pedals (although I did fit my son's preferred Red, Funn Taipan pedals; the emphasis here is on the Red colour rather than the pedal itself).

All this results in a bike that weighs just 6.5kg/14.3lbs with pedals fitted; that's a kilo/2.2lbs lighter than his smaller 14-inch-wheel Prevelo. Very impressive!

One last thing: the Seeker 16 comes with a bottle cage mount, which is rare on kids' bikes, even in larger sizes. I tried fitting an Elite CEO Jet cage, but the front triangle gap is too tight. However, Early Rider offers a Universal Utility Plate and Strap designed for small bottles. This shouldn’t be a negative, as I said; so many kids' bikes don’t offer bottle cages at all.

Performance

Before I get into how the bike performs, I just want to remind you all that our reviews of the best kids' bikes are based solely on our observations of our kids riding. We, of course, can’t ride them ourselves, and some younger kids, like my son, can't always articulate or critique precise handling characteristics.

First and foremost, I think the Early Rider's lower overall weight has really turbo-charged my son's riding. He immediately felt at home, given the bike's geometry isn’t all that different from his Prevelo, and built speed very, very quickly. As I mentioned at the beginning of this review, I don’t regret him riding a slightly heavier bike to start with for a minute, but it is clear geometry and weight need to go hand in hand more often.

This most notable difference has been on inclines, not so much on ‘hills’, as most parents will know hills just take time, muscle, size, and we have a towline for those; however, small rises on a path or terrain now have been a fun challenge and, in most cases, unnoticeable to him, where previously it wouldn’t have been possible. Some of that is his age, height, wheel size, and increased experience, but I have no doubt weight is a big factor, since he generally looks more comfortable moving the bike around.

The geometry changes Early Rider has made are clearly valuable, and I have noticed a marked improvement in my son's confidence hitting ‘scary’ terrain since putting a leg over the Seeker. For us, that's rocky, steeper sections of trail or longer descents on the local bike paths. A good example is the old railway line near us, which drops down to several road crossings where bridges have been removed over the years. Where he might have hopped off and walked down before, he is racing down, a heart-stopping moment for me, praying he stops for the road.

There is one quirk, though. Given the prevalence, rapid construction, and investment in pump tracks across the UK & US as great places for kids to learn to ride bikes and hone their skills, I noticed my son striking his pedals more often on the Seeker.

We frequent a number of them here in South East England, including a local BMX track. The lower bottom bracket, which is now as low as his smaller-wheeled Prevelo (Early Rider is 185mm w/90mm arms, Prevelo 181mm w/85mm arms), combined with the slightly longer wheelbase of the 16-inch Seeker, means the pedals, depending on the style of track, are very close to the ground.

This is with aftermarket Funn Tapien S Kids pedals, which add about 10mm to the leading edge, but that still doesn't offer much tolerance.

The bike isn't entirely to blame; I need to coach my son to keep his pedals level, but it's something to watch for. On the trail, this has not caused any issues yet, and this lower stance, as I said, is rapidly building confidence.

Value

Let's address the obvious elephant in the room: The Seeker 16 is £599 or $749 direct in the US, which is undeniably a lot for a kids' bike. However, I have no doubt the Early Rider is worth every penny.

I'll use the Prevelo example again, not just because we have experience with the Zulu, but because there aren’t many bikes in this part of the market. The Zulu Two, which is the size up from our Zulu One, is $50/£35 cheaper than the Seeker– however, claimed weights don’t match the actuals in my experience, and it also isn’t quite there in terms of specification and finish kit.

The Orbea Kimu was our first choice and was set to be only £399. Unfortunately, Orbea decided not to sell the bike in the UK or the US. Another popular bike in parent-cyclist Reddit threads is the Nukeproof Cub, which is also only £399 but has a much lower specification and only mechanical disc brakes.

I'd go a step further: even in a more crowded market, the Early Rider offers so much for the price, even compared with some adult bikes, especially if you plan to hand it down. There is also a thriving second-hand market for these bikes, so they hold their value well.

So once you take all this into account, I can’t fault the Seeker; many will pick at the price, but if you want to save some cash, you could consider the more affordable Belter 16, which is very similar but forgoes the disc brakes, thereby also saving a considerable amount of weight.

Right now, Early Rider has the market, and for good reason: the Seeker is brilliant and builds on years of dedicated focus on solutions to improve kids’ riding experiences. However, if Orbea, Nukeproof, or Prevelo start to catch up on spec, weight, or availability, that higher cost could be more troubling.

Tech spec

• Price: UK - £599, US - $749
• Weight: 6.5kg/14.3lbs with pedals fitted
• Age: 4-6 years
• Standover: 41cm/16.1"
• Max seat height: 56cm or 22"
• Min seat height: 47cm or 18.5"
• Frame & Fork: AL6061, brushed finish, forged dropouts
• Wheels: 16" 24h, double-walled on sealed bearing hubs
• Tyres: Kenda Booster 16" x 2.2"
• Brakes: ER Crux Hydraulic brakes w/14mm Rotors
• Stem: 35mm - 31.m clamp
• Handlebar: 500mm, 25mm/1" rise & 19mm grip diameter
• Cranks: ER Crux 90mm long

After a brief hiatus brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic, Kuota saw an opportunity to modernise its range and shift its manufacturing approach to one-piece moulded carbon construction. Fast forward to 2026, and the brand is back in business and on a mission to rekindle its past success. While its relevance in today’s landscape will be challenged by perennial marques, not to mention the onslaught of new Chinese bikes, Kuota’s decorated history, including stage victories at the Tour de France and Giro d’Italia, should stand it in good stead in what is fast becoming a flooded market.

Kuota's relaunch comprises a revamped three-model road bike lineup: the K-A1 aero road bike (pictured here), the Khan climbing bike, and the K-Uno endurance bike, all developed in partnership with the Ukyo UCI Continental cycling team. The range is further bolstered by the UCI-level KT06 time trial and Kalibur triathlon bike.

While handsomely appointed and relatively well-priced, can the Kuota K-A1 compete in a segment blighted by super-discounting and the rise of premium Chinese bikes?

We put it to the test in late summer, logging nearly 600km of testing to find out.

Design details

Unlike the bulk of contemporary aero road bikes that use a semi-monocoque design approach - two sections bonded together (front and rear triangle) - the K-A1 utilises a one-piece carbon monocoque frame, or One-Piece Moulding (OPM), making it one of a few bikes in its class to use this kind of construction.

As a result, the K-A1 utilises a seamless T800/1000 carbon layup from front to back with no hidden joins - something that is clearly visible thanks to the deliberately exposed carbon on the rear stays and sections of the bike. According to Kuota, this manufacturing technique ‘increases structural integrity, improvesstiffness-to-weight characteristics, enhances durability and delivers greater manufacturing consistency.’

Visually, the Kuota K-A1 is a good-looking machine and follows the contemporary aero road bike design blueprint, with dropped seatstays, deep tube profiling and full cable integration throughout. While nothing particularly unique given the cookie-cutter facades dominating the category, Kuota has introduced several paint designs to help it stand out from its rivals. Our test bike features a glossy oxblood wash and a matte clear coat, leaving the mottled carbon visible and creating a premium look.

The K-A1 is available in six sizes: 46, 49, 52, 55, 58 and 61cm with racy geometry to match. As such, our size 52cm test bike pairs a 53.4cm top tube with a 72.8-degree head and 74.2-degree seat tube angle. The stack and reach figures are very aggressive at 495 and 384mm, and the 410mm chainstays and sub-one metre wheelbase make for an agile and fleet-footed machine – it must be said that it won’t suit everyone, especially those who lack flexibility or prefer less imposing geometry. While the K-A1’s stack is significantly lower than its rivals, the 165mm cranks open up the hip angle without compromising the aero position.

Unlike many framesets catering exclusively to electronic actuation, Kuota has ensured the K-A1 is compatible with mechanical groupsets, too.

Specifications

The K-A1 is available in four builds with corresponding naming conventions - the K9R, K8R and K7S. The top-tier K9R and K8R are identical except for their groupset specification (Shimano Dura-Ace or Shimano Ultegra Di2); the K8S uses Shimano Ultegra Di2 with a cheaper wheelset and saddle, and the K7S is built around Shimano 105 Di2. Power meters are available on all models but at an additional cost.

As one of the more premium offerings in the K-A1 range, our K8R test bike arrived outfitted with a Shimano Ultegra Di2 groupset complete with 52/36T, 11-34T gearing and 165mm cranks, and Kuota ULT55 carbon wheels wrapped in 28mm Continental GP5000 tyres with TPU inner tubes. The wheelset is undoubtedly the star of the build, weighing 1,250g and featuring CNC-machined hubs, ceramic bearings, and a super-fast-engaging 52T ratchet hub. The wheels not only reduce total system weight but also add a premium feel and performance boost to the package.

A 38cm FSA K-Force integrated bar-stem and Selle Italia SLR Boost Superflow titanium saddle round out the touchpoints. The bottom bracket is of the threaded variety and comes standard with ceramic bearings; titanium hardware is used throughout the build.

All in, the 52cm Kuota K-A1 tipped the scales at 7.3kg without pedals.

Performance

Kuota has done an impressive job with the K-A1. The frame is notably stiff thanks to the one-piece monocoque construction, making it an incredibly responsive, communicative machine – this is a race bike after all, and ‘firm’ ride quality comes with the territory. That said, it’s not the harshest-riding performance aero bike I've sampled – besides, this can be somewhat softened by swapping out the TPU inner tubes for a tubeless setup or fitting slightly wider tyres.

The K-A1 comes stock with 28mm Contis but has clearance for tyres up to 32mm, which is worth considering if your training roads include broken and bumpy surfaces. Swapping the Kuota Ult55s for Dura-Ace C50 wheels wrapped in 30mm Hutchinson Blackbird Race tubeless tyres improved the ride quality but not at the expense of feel and communication, which I appreciated.

Kuota has nailed the rider-bike connection, and it’s sublime on twisty descents. The 165mm cranks also add confidence in the corners, letting you lean more aggressively and carry extra speed without fear of a pedal strike.

It climbs well, too, but isn’t as snappy on super-steep inclines as a dedicated all-rounder or climbing bike. It feels like any other low-stack aero bike on double-digit gradients – especially during out-of-the-saddle accelerations, but it’s capable enough to get over the worst, even some of the nastiest inclines the Surrey Hills have to offer. Of course, the near-7kg system weight helps. The K-A1 thrives more on shallower gradients, where you can remain seated and use its speed to flatten rolling terrain.

If there’s one area I’d upgrade, and this is not a criticism but rather a compliment to its aerodynamics, it’s the stock 52/36T chainring arrangement. I often found myself spinning out over rolling terrain and long, shallow downhills where an extra tooth or two would have helped.

Value

As an out-and-out aero bike, the K-A1 goes head-to-head against the Merida Reacto 9000, Basso SV and Giant Propel Advanced Pro. It’s also worth looking at what’s coming out of China, so I've thrown the Quick Pro ER:One into the mix for more context on value.

The Merida Reacto 9000 is a superb bike: fast, composed, and very well-priced at £6,250. I tested it at its global launch in Spain, and praised its incredible handling and all-round brilliance. While it also benefits from 32mm tyre clearances, it’s unfortunately not available in the States and utilises a bonded, two-piece frame.

It’s worth looking at the Basso SV, too. While not an out-and-out rival, I added it here because it's one of the few race bikes that also uses carbon monocoque construction. At £6,999 / $10,495 / €7,799, it’s pricier than the Kuota but does pip it and the other bikes mentioned here on tyre clearance: 35 vs 32mm.

The Giant Propel is another aero bike that is hard to ignore, especially on price. At £5,799 / $7,800 / €6,950, it’s nearly £600 cheaper than the Kuota at the same spec level and comes with a power meter. Like the K-A1 and Reacto, tyre clearance is limited to 32mm, and the frame is bonded.

That leaves the Quick Pro. Surprisingly, like the Kuota K-A1, the Quick Pro ER:One is manufactured as a monocoque with high-modulus T1100 and M65 carbon fibre. In the equivalent spec, granted the wheels aren't in the same league and it lacks ceramic bearings and titanium hardware, it comes in at £4,390 / $4,999 / €4,790, undercutting everything here by a hefty sum, but questions about its brand cachet and limited warranty are worth considering.

At £6,399 / $8,588 / €7,499, the K-A1 represents the middle-ground on value. While I’m disappointed it doesn't come with a power meter as standard, its heritage and one-piece construction alone make it a solid investment, backed by a 10-year guarantee on the frame and fork. With so many popular marques dominating club rides and race events, it’s refreshing to see Kuota back where it belongs and at a price point that isn’t too far out of reach. Also, if the Ultegra Di2 version is a bit too pricey for your liking, there is another Ultegra Di2 build with less-fancy wheels for £5,999, and an even cheaper 105 Di2/SRAM Rival AXS version at £4,899.

In fact, there's also a frameset that costs £1,875.

Scoring breakdown

Tech spec

• Price: £6,399 / $8,588 / €7,499
• Brand: Kuota
• Frame: Kuota ultra-lightweight K-A1
• Fork: Kuota ultra-lightweight K-A1
• Weight: 7.3kg (actual, 52cm)
• Sizes: 46, 49, 52, 55, 58, 61cm
• Levers: Shimano Ultegra Di2
• Brakes: Shimano Ultegra, 160/140mm front/rear
• Rear derailleur: Shimano Ultegra Di2
• Front derailleur: Shimano Ultegra Di2
• Crankset:  Shimano Ultegra 52/36T (165mm cranks)
• Cassette: Shimano Ultegra 11-34T
• Chain: Shimano Ultegra
• Wheels: Kuota UTL55
• Tyres: Continental GP5000 tyres, 28mm
• Bar/stem: FSA K-Force
• Seatpost: Kuota carbon
• Saddle: Selle Italia SLR Boost Superflow titanium

For the last decade or so, the Merida Reacto has been widely regarded as one of the best-value aero bikes on the market. Its blend of speed, weight, comfort, and price has made it a strong alternative to the Specialized Tarmac, Trek Madone, or Cervelo S5, appealing to riders who think with their head rather than their heart.

We've already sampled the fifth-generation Merida Reacto at the global launch in Spain, and while we were impressed with how it fared over the 300km of riding, local testing always reveals a bike's true character and potential flaws. With rumours of a return to WorldTour racing in 2027, it promises more speed via some hefty aero claims and slightly less heft, with the frame now weighing a claimed 950g. But have direct-to-consumer brands and growing competition from the Far East eaten up its USP?

I’ve spent the summer aboard the Shimano Ultegra Di2-equipped Merida Reacto 9000 on the mixed parcours of South Wales to find out.

Design details

The new Reacto has seen more changes to its design and aesthetics compared to its predecessor than we often see from new releases; personally, I think that the frame looks the business. The bladed fork legs and deep headtube look purposeful, and the angular seat stay junction creates a bike with better balance than many rival aero bikes, which, in my opinion, can look a little front-heavy.

Of course, the frame design prioritises function over form, and the most obvious changes are at the rear end, with a more pronounced wheel cutout on the seat tube and a cutout on the S-Flex carbon seatpost. Both of these are said to aid comfort, allowing vertical compliance over rough surfaces without compromising lateral stiffness for out-the-saddle sprints.

This Reacto 9000 model is available in two colour options: a classy slate grey and black, or this ‘Effect Silver’, complete with a metallic silver and bronze finish over the naked carbon frame. I’m not always a fan of bikes that are ‘half painted,’ but I love this.

The Reacto 9000 is the cheapest in the range to feature the top-spec CF5 V carbon frame, the same carbon-fibre layup we expect to see raced in the World Tour next year. The frame has space for up to 32mm tires, which should be enough for most riders, but unlike many recent releases, it doesn’t feature UDH and instead uses a press-fit BB86 bottom bracket rather than a threaded one.

Specifications

My test bike came equipped with Shimano’s Ultegra R8100 Di2 groupset, complete with a sensible 52/36T crankset but rather surprisingly an 11/30T cassette, which gives the bike less gear range than necessary and, indeed, less than what many pros use these days; I would argue that professional races vary less in speed than most amateur rides, so this does strike me as a slightly odd choice and I would guess it’s been made for one of two reasons: to keep weight down or because of availability.

A 60mm-deep pair of Reynolds BL60 wheels helps the bike dominate flat rides. The rims have a pretty narrow internal width of 21mm and are fitted with a pair of 28mm Continental GP5000s TR tyres.

For £6,250 / $8,500 you also get an integrated cockpit in the form of a Vision Metron 5D bar and stem which looks clean but at 40cm wide at the tops and flaring out to closer to 42cm at the drops I would argue seems a little out of kilter on a bike with such lofty aero ambitions.

Performance

The Reacto is undoubtedly an impressive bike to ride no matter the parcours. The lateral stiffness and competitive weight (7.53kg on my scales) meant that it was easy to forget that this is a fully fledged aero bike when climbing out of the saddle, and the changes at the rear end have certainly helped boost comfort to bring it in line with all-rounders such as the Tarmac SL8 (I haven’t ridden the SL9 yet) and the latest generation of Canyon Aeroad.

The handling sees no radical departure from the previous generation of Reacto and that’s no bad thing, with the additional road-buzz-cancelling ability of the frame, it’s a confident descender, and on the whole, the performance of the Reacto is every bit as good as it claims to be.

My only real gripe comes with the aforementioned handlebar width. With its aerodynamically enhanced tube shapes and 60mm deep wheels, the Reacto was impressively fast on the flats, but I couldn’t help feeling it could have been even better with a narrower bar. Merida does use a much narrower bar on the bikes higher up the model’s range, but unlike some brands there isn’t the option to customise your build at the checkout. The best bet may be to find an accommodating Merida dealer willing to swap the bar for a different size.

I’m sure Merida has its reasoning, and some people won’t want a narrower bar, but I think a lack of component options is an area where established brands need to improve. With regard to handlebars specifically, it’s also a problem that has become far more expensive to remedy, given the industry’s wide embrace of integrated cockpits on race bikes. While this issue is by no means isolated to the Reacto, it could be a reason enough for some to consider looking elsewhere because if a bike isn’t optimised for you, it doesn’t really matter how good it is. Okay, rant over!

Value

The Reacto’s party piece has always been that it can mix it up with the best in the business, such as the Tarmac, Madone and Cervelo S5, whether in the wind tunnel, on the scales or out on the road, and then, much like the Giant Propel, it sucker-punches the competition when it comes to price, so we’ve ascertained that the latest generation can still mix it with the best out on the road, but does it still represent the ‘sensible’ choice?

Well, a similar spec Cervelo Soloist will set you back £750 more, the Specialized Tarmac SL8 Pro is £7,250 / $8,499, so a full £1,000 more than the Reacto and it’s a similar story with the Madone at RRP.

Unfortunately for Merida, and through no fault of its own, I think the playing field has shifted. The Rose Shave FF is not only lighter at 7.1kg, but it also comes with a power meter for £5,800 / $7,678. You can also get a Canyon Aeroad with the same groupset for less; the Aeroad CF SLX may not have the same frame as the range-topping CFR, but it is still very good and has a RRP of £5,699 / $6,499.

We haven’t had the chance to ride Cube’s 2027 range yet, but the recently updated Litening Aero matches the Reacto on paper, at least.

And that’s before we get on to the Far Eastern direct-to-consumer brands such as Quick Pro, Tavelo, X-LAB, etc. This model seems to have done nothing wrong, yet it enters a different world from the one the previous generation of Reacto left behind. It’s competitively priced, but it's not quite the no-brainer it used to be.

Scoring breakdown

Tech specs

• Price: £6,250
• Size: M/L
• Weight: 7.53kg
• Groupset: Shimano Ultegra R8100 Di2
• Crankset: 52/36T Shimano Ultegra R8100 with power meter
• Wheels: Reynolds BL60
• Tyres: 28mm Continental GP5000 ST R
• Brakes: Shimano Ultegra
• Bar/Stem: Vision Metron 5D
• Seatpost: Merida S-Flex carbon
• Saddle: Prologo Nago R4 PAS

As a gravel convert of a few years now, I've ridden a number of tyre brands, widths and treads. I've found success with a few of these, depending on the time of year and the terrain, but among the best I've used of late has to be the Panaracer GravelKing X1.

They are sporting some solid discounts this Amazon Prime Day – as, in fact, are the whole GravelKing line in Panaracer's UK Amazon shop, with discounts up to 51% depending on what you're buying.

Going on tread alone, the X1s are the gnarliest in this venerable line, which began with the original SK version and has become something of a benchmark in the discipline. However, the on-bike experience tells a different story. They have a decent amount of bite off-road, of course, but they're also fast-rolling on hardpack and tarmac, so I've used them for all manner of rides in all manner of seasons, including 50-mile-plus rides that are mostly tarmac.

In all that time, I've experienced no issues, and no flats. In terms of getting them mounted, it depends which wheels you're using. I've used them on a couple, and they were super easy on one set, super hard on the other (in that case I used the Tyre Glider - not discounted this Prime Day, but so affordable you probably don't need it to be. Job done).

The X1s are sold on Amazon in either all-black or black with brown sidewalls, and 35, 40 and 45mm sizes. There's also a 48mm version in all-black only. They feature Panaracer's ZSG compound for grip, and Beadlock for easy mounting and seating. With the 45mm versions available from £25.99, this is a great opportunity to buy.

Assos has a whole new range of race-focused aero gear, developed in part through the brand’s previous partnership with Tudor Pro Cycling and now with EF Education-EasyPost WorldTour teams. Topping the range is the RSR Bolide lineup, with this jersey as the item of choice for fast, warm days of racing.

Design details

The latest Eagle-01 textile is designed to provide an aerodynamic foundation for the jersey. It's a textured, ribbed material that transitions from the arms to the shoulders to improve airflow around both areas as well as down the back. This is a new addition for 2026, while the Hawk-01 diamond-patterned body fabric was first used on the brand's Rapidfire Chronosuit. Again it aims to improve breathability, fit, and aerodynamics.

The rear of the jersey uses an open mesh structure, which makes sense given this is a key area for expelling heat from the rider.

All these fabrics come under the new AeroScience design methodology, where every panel and seam is tailored to improve aerodynamic performance. This includes external taping of the seams so they don't impair airflow, racingFit AEPD fitting to reduce material bunching, and zero-seam pockets.

As for those pockets, they are fairly standard, with three large ones at the rear, but feature no external seams and a fold-over top structure to prevent items from sticking out of the top. Meanwhile, the neckline has been lowered to improve breathability, with the jersey featuring other practical elements such as a zip guard to protect bib shorts from abrasion.

The White Series range is the only colour at present, which works well for hot weather riding. Sizes run from XS to 2XL, but the fit is very tight.

Performance

Once on it's clear this is a garment designed for racing and for riding fast. The jersey's fit means that when you stand upright, it tugs and pulls across and under the shoulders in an uncomfortable way. Hop on the bike, however, and this quickly makes sense.

The AEPD fit Assos uses means there is less material at the front of the jersey, and the shoulders pull in; when you get on the bike, there is no excess material at the front or bunching around the shoulders. It's designed for a more aggressive riding position, and it feels good when you assume said position. Just don’t expect it to be as comfortable if your riding style is more relaxed and upright.

The jersey's main flex comes from the mesh panel across the back. It also dissipates heat very effectively, which, when it hots up, makes it comfortable to wear. The fabric on the front and the sleeves is not quite as breathable, but the design relies on you travelling at higher speeds where the mesh rear acts like an exhaust to expel excess body heat.

I also appreciate that the jersey comes in white rather than the traditional black series colourway that Assos has often championed in the top of the range models within the Equipe line. With the sun beating down on you, it helps reduce heat buildup. The only non-white area is the pocket. This is a slightly odd design choice as this is an area where I find heat does build up quite a lot anyway, especially with the pocket stuffed with various spares and nutrition products. The pockets themselves, however, are quite effective. They aren't massively deep, so a large smartphone struggles to stay fully submerged, but they are wide enough to hold a range of sports gels and bars or smaller items of clothing, such as one of the best cycling gilets.

In terms of aerodynamic performance, it is nearly impossible to quantify while riding out on the road. I tend to use MyWindSock and my ever-reliable 4iiii power meter to detect some degree of the coefficient of drag, but many external factors can affect it. The jersey certainly uses plenty of sound design principles that have been shown to perform well at reducing drag.

My only small gripe is that some seams aren't flatlock, so they often leave impressions against your skin due to the jersey's tight fit. It's a small detail, but personally I would've liked to see flatlock seams used. However, this isn't always possible on certain fabrics and design structures, so I should give Assos the benefit of the doubt.

Value

That brings us to the elephant in the room: the price of this jersey. It's just over £300 (£305 / $380), which puts it in the same territory as many bib shorts, let alone jerseys. For reference, it wasn’t that long ago that a jersey reaching or just exceeding the £200 / $250 mark was considered excessively high-priced. This is certainly the most expensive cycling jersey I have ever tested.

The problem is that many other highly effective, aero-focused race jerseys significantly undercut the Bolide's price. The Rapha Pro Team Aero jersey is £190 / $245, while the incredibly breathable Castelli Aero Race 8S is £175 / $200 and one that I rate very highly.

Even if you go for another tried-and-tested, extensively wind-tunnel-tested option such as the Rule28 One jersey, it is still only £180. It can get a little bit warmer, but for over £100 cheaper it offers significantly better value.

The problem is that, as much as I like this jersey for performance, it is still too expensive to represent good value. The fact of the matter is that you can get a jersey that is probably very close when it comes to aerodynamic performance, and possibly even better when it comes to breathability, for a significantly lower price. This may be the fastest jersey available, but even then, it will probably still be single-digit watt differences at 45km/h.

Tech specs

• Price: £305 / $380
• Pockets: 3
• Fit: Race aero
• Type: Short sleeve
• Colours: White
• Sizes: XS to 2XL

Rab is an outdoor brand that is very well known for making excellent down sleeping bags and mountaineering clothing, as well as walking gear for less extreme adventures. With the Cinder collection, it has turned its technical expertise to the gravel clothing market. The range encompasses pretty much everything from waterproofs to cargo bib shorts, as well as base layers and jerseys, with some fabrics borrowed from its outdoor products and other pieces designed from scratch.

The Men's Cinder Windveil Biking Vest is a lightweight gilet that offers a bit of wind protection while remaining easily packable.

Design details

Rab has a long-standing relationship with Pertex and uses its fabrics in many of its outdoor products. The Cinder Windveil Biking Vest employs Pertex Quantum Air as the main wind-resistant material across the front, sides, shoulders, and lower back. The upper back is made from Motiv Aero, the same highly breathable, stretchy material used in the Cinder Biking Jersey.

At the back is a large, horizontally zipped pocket that doubles as a stuff sack for the gilet; it's big enough that the vest takes up only about half the space when packed away, leaving plenty of room for a pair of arm warmers or a beanie.

The YKK zipper is not double-ended, unfortunately, so the gilet can’t be undone from the bottom for jersey pocket access or venting, although the zip is matched to the gilet’s colour and there is a zip guard to protect the chin from irritation. An elasticated section with a cord lock across the rear hem lets you snug it up around the waist while the front stays flat. Silicone CNDR branding on the inside of the hem helps to prevent the gilet from riding up.

The collar is a decent height and is lined with Motiv Aero fabric for comfort against the skin and a bit of structure, whilst the armholes are Lycra-bound.

Colours for men are Light Khaki, Tempest Blue and Tuscan Red, with sizes from S to XL. It is also available in a women’s fit in sizes 8 to 16, in Green Slate, Plum, Tempest Blue, and Tuscan Red.

Rab gives the weight of a size medium as 92g; my small weighed 84g.

Performance

As with the Cinder Biking Jersey, the gilet sizing is very odd. The medium that was initially sent was simply gigantic, so it was rapidly switched for a size small - perhaps I should have noticed that the 6’3” model on the Rab website was wearing a slightly baggy size medium, rather than going by Rab’s size guide. The small fit better, but my days of a 30-inch waist are long gone, so ignore Rab’s suggestions fit-wise.

The on-bike fit was mixed.

The very long back certainly gave good coverage and was in no danger of riding up, although this had nothing to do with the silicon gripper, as this was never in contact with anything - strangely, the channel for the elastic hem cord was very deep, so naturally, when tightened, the cord migrated to the top, leaving a small tutu-like flap above my bum. The gripper is on the underside of this flap, so it has no chance of doing its job. I also think the cord lock should have been captive, allowing the waist to be cinched one-handed while riding, instead of being a two-handed operation. Tugging the very end of the cord kind of achieves this, but it leaves a very long tail and causes the cord lock to jam with the tab that's meant to hold the cord.

I also really missed the ability to undo the zip from the bottom to access my jersey pockets; a small thing that makes a huge difference whilst riding.

The waist fit was reasonable (for a gravel-type product), but there was plenty of excess fabric around the upper stomach and chest, especially when leaning forward. Even in size small, the armholes were excessively large, gaping open enough to let plenty of cool air in. Perhaps more barrel-chested riders than me might find the fit better – perhaps I shouldn't have skipped chest day at the gym.

The collar was a high point, both literally and figuratively. It was nice and tall, with the Motiv Aero fabric doing a good job of providing structure and a pleasant feel against the skin.

Unsurprisingly, the Pertex fabrics were very good: extremely light, breathable, and pleasant to wear. The Quantum Air was softer and quieter than many wind-resistant materials, but given the gilet's overall poor fit, it still flapped a lot at speed.

I didn’t have much call for the large rear pocket, but it worked well as a stuff sack for the gilet and was certainly easy to use, given its size.

Value

I have to admit that I am surprised and disappointed that a brand with the heritage and expertise of Rab has produced this vest. There are glimmers of hope, like the fabric choice and the collar, but overall, it is simply not a very good cycling gilet.

The sizing, huge armholes, and excess fabric when in a riding position are poor, and while £70 is a reasonable price for what the Cinder Windveil Biking Vest offers on paper, the execution means that it can’t be recommended when there are a plethora of better options on the market at both higher and lower price points.

Tech specs

• Price: £70 / $90
• Weight: 84g (medium)
• Pockets: One
• Colours: Light Khaki, Tempest Blue and Tuscan Red
• Sizes: S to XL.

Like many Italian shoe brands, Fizik shoes have traditionally been long and narrow, but with the Ferox 2 and Vega for the road, it has updated the last to deliver a more ergonomic fit, designed to be for suitable for a wider range of users, and not just professionals.

The shoes use a full carbon outsole for high-pace gravel racing, with a mix of dials and Velcro straps to provide secure foot retention. They now sit at the top of the tree in Fizik’s off-road shoe range.

But just how do these gravel bike shoes perform when put through their paces? To find out, I went gravel KOM hunting across local forest trails, adventuring through bridleways and plenty in between to see how they fare against the competition.

Design details

The Ferox 2 starts with what the brand calls its Anatomical Last. It features less of a heel-to-toe drop than the previous last, plus a wider forefoot better shaped to accommodate the toes. This is also featured on the Vega road shoes and came from Fizik studying the pressure distribution of riders’ feet. It found that reducing the heel-to-toe drop dramatically reduced forefoot pressure, while the wider front eliminated lateral hotspots around the toes.

Based on this new last, the Ferox 2 uses a full carbon fiber sole to deliver high stiffness and power transfer. A good amount of the outsole is protected with TPU tread so as to avoid scuffs and scrapes from stones and such. The sole gets a stiffness index rating of 10, the highest available for Fizik shoes, on a scale with no industry standard.

The upper is a one-piece design featuring a bootie fit rather than traditional sides and tongue. This is made from Airprene with perforations towards the upper section, and a scratch-resistant PU-laminated covering across the front and sides.

Retention comes from a Boa Li2 dial on the forefoot and a Powerstrap Velcro strap at the top. The latter is designed to be crash-proof (a dial can be at risk during a fall), while also spreading pressure across a wider area. It also has the benefit of being more adjustable than laces.

The claimed weight is 295g per shoe, while a size 45 came in at 342g on my scales with the insole fitted.

Performance

Getting these shoes on can be a bit of an ordeal, as the bootie-like upper doesn’t have the same flexibility as a traditional tongue design. It is similar to the Specialized Ares shoe, which similarly felt like it required a shoehorn, and the Q36.5 Unique Pro shoes, which do come with a shoehorn. Once on, however, the Ferox 2 are very comfortable, with the lack of material helping to keep the weight down

Adjusting the retention to the right level did take a little time. Shoes equipped with Boa dials top and bottom can be adjust easily. This remains the here case for the forefoot, but the Velcro strap around the ankle takes a little more refinement to get right. On some rides I found I had tightened it too much as my foot expanded in the heat. Other times my foot moved around a little as I hadn’t tightened it enough. The Powerstrap system is far easier to adjust than laces, of course, but a little more involved than a retention dial.

However, once you’ve got things dialled in, excuse the pun, the system stiffness of this shoe is fantastic. The sole provides a great platform for efficient power transfer to the pedals, while the strap-and-dial combination delivers a secure foot feel. The boot-like upper design means that even with the retention clamped down, no areas of the shoe pinch.

The tread is effective in multiple ways. The outer tread to the cleat bolts is the right height, so you don't need cleat shims to fit platformed gravel pedals such as the WolfTooth DEL or Look X-One-G. I also found that on the occasions when I did need to trek on foot, the shoes stayed secure on loose, dusty ground.

Speaking of dust, the lower section is very easy to wipe clean, thanks to the laminate upper. Meanwhile, the sock-like element towards the opening is a bit of a dirt magnet. This was okay for these black shoes, but in the lighter colour options I can imagine it would be very difficult to keep those clean. White knitted fabric and mud or dust do not tend to mix well.

Value

At £319.99 / $369.99, the Fizik Ferox 2 are not cheap, but compared with similar-spec gravel race shoes, they fare well.

The Specialized S-Works Recon Evo, for example, is £399.99 / $550, while the Sidi Aeron is prices at £349 / $569.99.

The Sidi Aeron, however, is significantly heavier at 407g per shoe in the same size, and although it features two dials, I think I prefer the retention of the Ferox 2 shoes overall.

The S-Works Recon Evo are a bit wider, but the Ferox 2 were not lacking in width. Arguably, the Recon Evo is a stiffer platform, but weight-wise they come out at a similar level, and there isn't enough difference between the two shoes to warrant the price hike for the Recon Evo.

There are, of course, cheaper options out there, but when it comes to the balance of stiffness, low weight, and value, the Fizik Ferox 2 is an impressive offering.

Tech specs

• Price: £319.99 / $369.99 / €329
• Sole: Carbon
• Sizes: 36-48 (half sizes 37.5-46.5)
• Weight: 342g per shoe (size 45)
• Retention: Boa dial and Velcro strap
• Colours: Black-dark forest, Lilac-black, Blue-black, Light grey-mint green, White-light grey

The Pas Normal Escapism jersey has been designed in conjunction with the PAS Racing gravel team to create a jersey designed for fast paced gravel and hybrid riding.

Design details

PNS says this jersey is designed for warmer conditions. It’s made from “lightweight, structured fabrics with a dry, matte hand feel, offering high breathability and a rugged look suited to long days off-road.” Personally, the material is a bit heavier than the previous Escapism Light jersey, but this version adds a lot of new features that you don't always see in even the best gravel clothing.

Instead of just the standard three rear pockets, it also has a zip-up valuables pocket and an external side-entry stash pocket designed to prevent used wrappers from being pulled out of the main pockets when reaching for food. Two additional 'stash' pockets have been added to the rear of the arms of the jersey to keep them out of the airflow.

The jersey also features a two-way zip, often reserved for gilets or jackets, designed to improve breathability while limiting material flapping at speed. The lower zip has a longer tab to make it easier to pull up while riding rough off-road terrain.

The jersey is described as featuring a race fit, more akin to the Mechanism line of kit rather than the Essential, both from PNS. Paired with a silicone gripper across the rear, it aims to keep everything in place while riding on gravel surfaces.

The jersey comes in three colours, Dark Red, Light Olive, and Black, with sizes ranging from XS to XXL.

Performance

I like race fit jerseys because they keep everything in place, while a looser fit can cause pockets to shift at the rear. To that end, I've used the Escapism jersey across a range of gravel rides. It's performed well and is extremely comfortable. However, my testing period has raised a few questions.

Firstly, that two-way zip. This often improves breathability, and to an extent, it can work with this jersey without the top section billowing. My issue is that it means no zip guard at the base of the jersey, and it's led to some pilling on the shorts I have used with it, as the zip or reinforced section at the base rubs the fabric.

This leads me to my second minor gripe: personally, I find the fabric a bit too thick, so I can get very warm above 25˚C / 77˚F. That’s probably true of many jerseys, to be fair, but I would have preferred a more perforated material at the rear, especially since this is billed as a higher-paced gravel ride jersey, where more effort equals more heat.

There are a lot of elements that I do like on this jersey though. The little stash pockets on the rear of the arms are inspired. They keep wrappers out of airflow for some marginal aero gains, while freeing up the main pockets so that when you're pulling out food you don’t spill the contents. There is another flap on the rear left of the jersey as well above the cargo pocket. Those pockets themselves are large and can fit a lot, be it spares or food, while the zip-up pockets keep valuables safe and secure.

Another element I really like is the large silicone gripper at the rear. I hate when jerseys with loaded pockets shift around to one side on my back, and this gripper prevents that from ever happening. It does however get quite warm after a solid bout of higher intensity.

I also like the colour options. It’s a little cliché going for earthy colours for gravel riding, but they are smart options and there’s always black if you want a more standard offering. I just don’t quite agree that the jersey is specifically for warmer conditions; I think the brand's previous Escapism Light jersey was more suitable for those conditions, while this version is something I could happily use in cooler spring or autumn conditions rather than height of summer.

Value

At £175 / $235 / €200, the Pas Normal Studios Escapism jersey is not cheap. Among gravel jersey competitors, the main players are probably the MAAP Alt_Road 2.0 (£165 / $205), Rapha Brevet (£195 / $275), and Castelli Unlimited Pro jersey (£189 / $230).

The Castelli Unlimited Pro features bladder storage and aero materials, while MAAP and Rapha use Merino fabrics to reduce synthetics and improve day-to-day use. However, I would say the pocket solutions on the PNS Escapism are the most comprehensive of the bunch, and the value isn’t too bad against them.

Of course, there are the likes of the Sportful Supergiara 2 jersey, which is just £90 / $125 and does feature some added pockets, but perhaps not as many smarter features.

Tech specs

• Price: £175 / $235 / €200
• Pockets: Seven
• Fit: Race
• Type: Short sleeve
• Colours: Dark Red, Light Olive, and Black
• Sizes: XS to XXL

The early years of riding are as much about inspiring confidence on the bike as they are about enjoyment. In fact, the two things are inextricably linked. So any bike with design features that can tick those boxes is worth considering. The best kids' bikes can also accommodate growth and remove technical complexity for parents who might not be bike riders themselves. It's not easy to tick all those boxes though, especially with one eye on keeping price down.

Ridgeback's Dimension 20 definitely ticks a few of those, and inspired our test rider to try new routes and take on a few more challenges, all while keeping a smile on his face. He started riding this bike – which is aimed at 5.5 to 8.5-year-olds – as a six-year-old on the cusp of growing out of his 16-inch wheel bike. The size guide on the Ridgeback website suggests this Dimension 20 (there are five in the range) suits children from 111cm to 130cm. Which is, on average, around three years of growth.

In truth, the first couple of months of riding this bike it was clearly a bit big for him, but once he'd set eyes on it, there was no going back to his Woom 3 that had served him well until then. We put the saddle down as low as it would go and made sure his toes could touch the floor when straddling the saddle. It was a stretch, but as a confident rider, he made it work.

One key feature that allowed him to ride this size bike a little earlier than he would normally was the dropped top tube. It comes down from the headtube at a steeper angle before levelling off before it joins the seat tube under the saddle. This gives a little extra standover height when a rider is standing over their top tube, just in front of the saddle. If they can't do that, they're more likely to topple over sideways when they come to a stop.

Ridgeback has five 20-inch wheels in its range. The MX20 shares the same frame but comes with knobbly tyres and some cheaper componentry to drop the RRP by £60.

There's another Dimension 20, which has a straight top tube for a slightly older age range (six to nine years) and comes in £70 dearer thanks to a slightly better quality frame (not that the rider would notice) and a better mix of components.

Finally, a second MX20 and the Harmony both have suspension forks, which we'd probably sway you away from. At this price (both are £349.99) the tech in the forks is unlikely to be up to much, and we'd argue that very few riders between the ages of six and nine would be able to tackle terrain that requires suspension.

This Dimension 20 provides adequate components with no unnecessary features that bump the price up. The weakest of the components was the aluminium V-brakes. They took a little while to set up and went out of alignment on a couple of occasions. This could have been down to knocks they received putting it in and taking it out of the car boot, but V-brakes were never the best (in my opinion), so do make sure they're set up correctly.

Optimum set-up means having the right amount of cable pulled through to give tension, the brake pads toed in, and having them hit both sides of the rim at the same point in the pull. There was a tiny amount of reach adjustment in the brake levers themselves, although I would have liked them set a little closer to the bars.

The Jagwire cables and outers do mean the pull is smooth, and remained so throughout the test. The rims have a machined braking surface and a wear indicator – the black line running around the centre of the brake surface. Any child is going to grow out of this bike before they wear the rims down, but it's a useful tool if you're looking at a secondhand one.

The brakes worked as they needed to, they just need checking on regular occasions and adjusting when needed.

We loved the tyres on the bike, their nice wide, round profile inspired confidence, and the diamond tread with minimal raised profile worked well on all surfaces we covered. We've tested bikes with more aggressive treads (essentially knobbles that are raised a little higher and with bigger gaps in between them) but it's rare to ride through mud wet and deep enough to need such a tread. These worked just fine.

Handlebar grips may not seem important, and you don't need to spend extra money here, but as the main touchpoint for the rider they are essential. These had a nice, soft, rubbery feel, and there were no complaints from the rider that his hands hurt, or that they were slipping. The lip on the outer edge is there to keep hands from slipping off the side. The reach to the brake levers was 34mm (from the front of the grip to the back of the lever) with the adjuster screw wound in. Ideally, that would be a little closer to the bar.

The open drivetrain was a small step up from the 16 inch Woom 3, our previous test bike, which had a completely enclosed drivetrain, meaning no feet, ankles or fingers could get caught on the chain, spiked on the chainring, or covered in chain grease.

The Dimension has an exposed chain, but the chainring is covered on either side with a plastic guard, so ankles are protected from the teeth. A feature Ridgeback continue on their 24 and 27.5 inch wheel bikes.

Protection, for the bike, comes in the form of a cage around the rear derailleur. No parent will be surprised to read that a kid will happily lie their bike down (AKA drop it) in a flash to run to the toilet, stroke a dog, or pick up a stick that they like the look of.

Rear derailleurs are vulnerable when this happens, as the hanger they're attached to can get bent with hard or regular impacts, hence the cage. Some other bikes come with a kickstand, which is a better option, but not all children will think to use it when they see a particularly special stick that they desperately want to take home.

The Shimano derailleur gives a range of seven gears, controlled by paddle shifters underneath the right-hand brake lever. There's a good chance this will be your child's first geared bike, and learning when and how to use them is a key stage in their development.

Don't be surprised if this takes a few months for them to build up the confidence to use it. The upwards shift into a smaller gear is actuated by pushing in the thumbshifter (away from your body), which has a little more resistance than some little hands can deal with. Changing down the sprockets into a bigger gear is done with the downshift paddle actuated by the rider pulling it toward them with their index finger.

This takes a fair bit of concentration at first, and means the rider is subtly adjusting their grip in order to change gear. Instinct tells me that this should be easier than a gripshift gear change mechanism, but my daughter picked that up quicker when she first moved to a geared bike. It's hard to say if that's down to the rider or the tech. I wouldn't say one is more suitable for developing riders than the other; they're just different.

Adjustment in the bike for a growing rider

The only adjustment on the Dimension 20 is in the seatpost that has 14cm of vertical movement. (For which you'll need a 6mm hex key.) Growth spurts aside, this is likely to be more than enough to last at least two years' of riding, hopefully a bit more. (The 5.5 - 8.5 year age range is a guide to the type of age the bike will fit, not a guarantee that your child will ride it between those ages. Kids vary wildly in their sizes at certain ages and grow at different rates.)

Sadly, there is less adjustment at the front of the bike. There is 22mm of spacers under that stem, so if dropped right down when you first purchase it (get a mechanic to do this if you're not comfortable doing it) it can then be raised 22mm over time, along with the saddle.

There is however, no adjustment in forward reach with this fixed stem. This means that as the saddle goes up, the riding position will become a little lower and shorter, relative to saddle height. Without increased reach, a rider's centre of gravity can go a little higher than is ideal. It's not a massive problem, but it might just knock a few months of use off the bike. This can be countered by swapping out the stem for a longer one, just ensure it matches the fork column and bar diameters.

Value and Verdict

We've really enjoyed our time on the Dimension 20 which was a great transition bike for my six-year-old son as he stepped up to a 20 inch wheel bike for the first time. At £349.99 it's quite an investment and it's not hard to find other makes at less than half this price. But by spending more, you're assured a good quality bike that, if looked after, will last the two to three years this bike should cover, growth-wise. There was nothing on this bike that let it down. The frame, Shimano gears and tyres really stood out, and the contact points are good too.

The brakes needed a little adjustment, but a cheaper bike would have even worse components needing even more adjustment. The lack of inbuilt adjustability at the front is a problem for growing kids, but can be tackled by replacing it with a longer riser stem. That's a bit more cost both for the part and a mechanics time swapping it out, if you're not confident, but would be worth it to get more use out of it.

Plus, if you do invest in a good quality bike, and look after it, there's every chance of passing it down or selling it on when the time comes.

Riding while on your period can be tough; the last thing you want to be worrying about is leaking or discomfort from the likes of tampon strings.

The market has recently seen more brands trying to find a solution to bleeding and riding. The answer? Menstrual cycling shorts. These are essentially shorts with an adapted chamois designed for absorbing blood, they work a lot like period pants, which are now so commonplace you’ll find them in your local supermarket clothing aisle.

Van Rysel, Decathlon's in-house high-performance cycling brand, has now produced its first range of menstrual cycling shorts, offering both a bibless model (which we have on test) and a bib short version. I’ve got the bibless model on test, which retails at £34.99/€39.99. The ‘Ultra’ bib short model retails at £99.99/€119.99.

Design details

On first look, I noticed straight away that the material was buttery soft (main fabric being 32% Elastane, 68% Polyamide). I was also pleasantly surprised to see the use of zig-zag style stitching for the chamois.

Zig-zag stitching is often seen on more expensive cycling shorts and from my experience, is a lot more comfortable than a conventional stitch as it doesn’t cause irritation.

The chamois is also soft and Van Rysel says it can absorb 'up to 12 ml of liquid per use.' That’s about the same as a super absorbency tampon, a Mooncup can hold 29 to 30ml.

The chamois is made of 6 layers, a base of traditional foam designed to offer comfort in the saddle, with a top layer made from two fabrics that absorb liquids; in the core is a membrane that traps liquid inside it. Whilst studies have shown high levels of PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) within some period underwear, Van Rysel confirmed that its shorts do not use PFAS and that toxicological tests have been carried out.

There's also useful stretchy mesh pockets on the side of both legs.

I used the 'Find My Size' feature on the Decathlon website which suggested I go for size M. These felt a bit of a squeeze at first, but they fitted well after the first use. Therefore, I’d say they fit a touch on the small side as a size M is my usual go to.

Performance

During the testing phase I used the shorts both pre-menstruation and, of course, during.

The first test was carried out on the turbo, for a 3-hour session, when I wasn’t on my period. I find testing chamois when riding indoors to be a great determinant for how comfy they are due to the constant pressure and lack of movement.

What I found most noticeable was how well my sit bones were supported. The chamois towards the trunk is very well padded. Likewise, the zig-zag style stitching also sat flush to my body and skin: ensuring no irritation occurred.

Another design feature I appreciate is the length of the shorts. They are not short-shorts, sitting more than midway down my thighs. However, I do have very long thighs so this may not be the length everyone likes.

The absence of irritating silicone grippers was also very welcome. The shorts didn’t dig into my thighs nor ride up my leg. I have muscular thighs and often have to loosen off M size shorts if the elastic is particularly tight.

When riding outside, I thought the pockets were great, storing items (in my case, a jam filled brioche) very securely. Unfortunately, I did find the waist rolled down, I expect a higher waistline would avoid this. The problem was exacerbated when paired with short 'women’s fit' jerseys (for reference I have a medium length body and I’m 173cm tall).

I would also like more padding towards the front to protect the vulva and soft tissue better. However, given the entry-level price point, the level of support was not too disappointing. The material also shows sweat patches very visibly, which doesn’t bother me, however, it may do for others.

When used whilst cycling during my period I really experienced the benefit of these shorts. I found the chamois very absorbent. During my second day, I have a very heavy flow, one that has often soaked through other period products in the past if I’ve done a long ride.

At first, it did feel a little weird to “free bleed” into the shorts. But even after wearing the shorts for a long ride, the chamois had no issue in absorbing the blood. I didn’t feel wet or damp in the crotch either. If you struggle with sensory experiences, this will be great news.

After this ride I decided to see roughly how much blood was absorbed after wearing them for 3 hours and 25 minutes in total. So I ran them under the shower head and rinsed them out. A lot of blood came out. So I was very impressed with this main design feature.

I washed these shorts with my other cycling kit, using a normal detergent with a laundry sanitiser at 30 degrees C. They washed well, and continued to work as expected. I did ring the blood out before washing when my period was heavy, as a pre rinse, out of personal choice.

Value

All in all, I feel these shorts are impressive for the price point and are fantastic for use when menstruating. The shorts do the job of absorbing blood really well.

However, for me personally, I would far favour the bib shorts over the waist option. This is because the digging in and rolling up of the waist band was just too annoying for me to want to use them normally.

I also feel that if you are someone who likes to use a cup or tampon, this basically 'free bleed' system might not be for you. Instead I suggest you take a look at the best women's cycling shorts guide to find something more suitable.

Scoring breakdown

Why has the Magene C706 bike computer prompted me to lean over my bars for a closer look? Partly, because my social feeds are screaming with claims that it’s a Garmin Edge 1050 killer. So, I wanted to discover whether the hype around this bike computer is warranted. Is it good enough to break the grip the big three – Garmin, Wahoo and Hammerhead – have had on this market for years? Decades, in Garmin’s case.

Of course, Bryton has been valiantly chipping away at the edges of the market since 2011, and more recently, Coros made a sterling effort to bring unheard of reserves of battery life courtesy of its Dura computer. However, we’re now seeing a slew of Chinese brands attempt to break into the best cycling computers market, most notably iGPSport and Magene. Both promise parity with the big three on build quality, software and UI, while their sponsorship of WorldTour teams Groupama-FDJ United and XDS-Astana this season demonstrates just how serious they are about carving out a slice of the market.

To wedge a foot in the door, some Chinese brands, such as Coospo and Geoid, offer sub-£100/$100 units boasting predictably basic functionality. Magene is aiming much higher with the C706, a sophisticated bike computer that rivals the big three’s range-toppers. Its price tag? Well, it isn’t dirt cheap, but it is provocatively competitive.

For example, bundle a Garmin Edge 1050 with a pair of Garmin Rally dual-sided power meter pedals – arguably one of the most useful training accessories for a bike computer – and you’ll be handing over a whopping £1,298/$1,899 for the privilege. Invest in a Magene C706 and a pair of Magene P715 dual-sided power meter pedals, and you’ll be spending about half that amount. That’s a huge saving.

Magene isn't some fly-by-night operation, either. It has substantial OEM experience, producing electrical cycling products for brands such as Wahoo and Decathlon. So, its workforce knows how to screw tech together.

Design details

In the hand, the C706 looks and feels just as premium as flagship bike computers from the mainstays. Somehow, its build manages to convey a sense of weighty ruggedness despite tipping the scales at a respectable 111 grams. The alloy mounting boss quietly suggests quality and longevity – there are no cheap plastics to fail mid-ride here.

The large 3.3in colour touchscreen is the main feature, a backlit TFT panel that compares favourably in size to the Edge 1050’s 3.5in LCD display but is noticeably smaller than the Wahoo Elemnt Ace’s 3.8in transflective TFT behemoth. Unfortunately, Magene doesn’t publish specs for brightness, colour or resolution, which is a bit tiresome.

However, the C706 does impress with its thin bezel, allowing the generous 3.3in screen to be packed into a compact 55 x 97 x 14.8mm (2.2″ x 3.9″ x 0.6″) case. By comparison, the Edge 1050 is noticeably larger at 60.2 x 118.5 x 16.3 mm (2.4″ x 4.7″ x 0.6″). This makes the Magene a marginally more practical proposition on narrower bars and when space is tight on smaller third-party mounts.

It’s great to see that Magene’s product design team has included five physical buttons, always a blessing when wearing winter gloves or when heavy rain makes every touchscreen I’ve ever tried intermittently unresponsive. The buttons – three on the left-hand side of the case and two on the lower edge, flanking the USB-C port – are contextual, but they provide quick access to common riding functions such as power on and off, page changes, laps, recording controls and the electronic bell.

That’s right, there’s an electronic bell, which means that Magene has incorporated a proper speaker, rather than the shrill piezo buzzers commonly found on even flagship head units until a couple of years ago. Unconventionally, it’s housed in the alloy mounting boss – more on that later. As well as the bell tone, spoken navigation prompts, climb notifications and a host of alerts can be voiced through the speaker.

Uniquely, the C706 features a slender 1mm ‘Star Ring’ light band that wraps around its front lip. This will illuminate in one of twelve colours of your choice and can be set to pulsate (‘Breathe’, in Magene-speak) or flash. Additionally, an alternative state – Breathing, Flashing, Steady or Close (off) – can be triggered when certain conditions are met. For example, you can program it to shine solid red if your heart rate exceeds a pre-set limit. This is achieved through Magene’s Smart Assistant, which uses If-This-And-That-Then-Do-This style logic. Smart Assistant is currently quite limited in use, but it can also alter lighting network settings, warn when it’s time to eat and let you know if you’re exceeding a preset speed, which is useful for shared-use paths. The tech is in beta but shows promise.

Magene says that a full charge, via the USB-C port at the unit’s bottom edge, should be enough to power a 17 to 25-hour adventure, depending on temperature conditions and individual configuration. When not in use, the port is protected by a weather and dust-resistant cover – in fact, the C706 is waterproof to IPX7, which is enough to withstand an unplanned dunking in up to a metre of water for 30 minutes.

GPS functionality is dual-band, supporting five global systems: Beidou, GPS(L1+L5), Glonass, Galileo, QZSS. There are 8 gigabytes of storage on tap for global mapping, with all regions freely available via Magene’s OnelapFit app. Where Garmin and other competitors tend to ship their units with mapping largely pre-loaded, Magene requires you to download areas one at a time, which is slightly cumbersome but hardly a dealbreaker.

Navigation is thoroughly implemented. Maps can be zoomed and quickly switched from north-up to heading-up views. Should you ride off course, the C706 should re-route you to your destination or, if you prefer, to the nearest intersection. It’s also possible, via the OnelapFit app, to navigate back to start, save waypoints, generate custom routes and import GPX files. Unfortunately, it is not possible to input a destination directly into the C706, this can only be achieved via the app.

Magene’s ClimbPro is similar to Wahoo’s Summit suite of climbing features and Garmin’s identically named ClimbPro. Just like the competition, Magene’s version of ClimbPro automatically identifies climbs within an imported route and displays key metrics such as current gradient, average gradient, climb length, elevation profile, remaining distance and remaining ascent. It also works in ‘Freeride’ mode, where the unit can detect nearby climbs without a preloaded route, show them on screen, and guide you to the start.

Generously, Magene includes a TPU case/bumper and a screen protector with the C706, accessories that other brands typically charge about £20/$20 for. However, I wish it had provide a decent out-front mount instead. All that’s supplied in the box is a cheap bar/stem mount held in place with rubber O-rings, together with a compatible insert that can be screwed into third-party out-front mounts.

Finally, Magene’s OnelapFit is the C706’s companion app, used to configure many of its settings, manage maps and routes, create or import structured workouts, sync rides and analyse training data. It also provides the bridge to services such as Strava, Komoot and TrainingPeaks. It’s available for both iOS and Android.

Performance

Setup via the OnelapFit app is as routine as that of any of Magene’s competitors, with a couple of caveats. Essentially, it’s simply a case of registering a new account on a smartphone, then connecting the C706 via Bluetooth. Once you’ve entered your basic physiological attributes, connected the C706 to WiFi and downloaded any pressing firmware updates, you’re pretty much set.

However, downloading mapping is an additional step. It doesn’t take more than five minutes, but an extra step is an extra step when you’re impatient to get riding. Fortunately, the process is slick. The app prompts you to trace a rectangle around your target area within a global map. I chose to focus on the north Cotswolds, which entailed a modest 34.3 megabytes of data, including offline navigation files and climbing data.

Another mild frustration is that the C706 ships with just two outdoor ride profiles: Road and Commute. If you’re a gravel rider, own an e-bike or dabble in mountain biking, then you’ll need to create appropriate profiles manually from scratch. Thankfully, this is also astonishingly easy to accomplish using OnelapFit.

New pages can be configured, and existing pages appended, with grids covering an entire gamut, from an uncluttered single column displaying a single metric to a dozen data-dense cells. More than 110 available data fields cover almost every conceivable conventional metric, from time, temperature and speed to heart rate, power, climbing and cycling dynamics.

This may sound a lot – it is a lot – but it’s outgunned by the huge depth of information available on Garmin devices. The US brand goes much deeper, with many more permutations of the same underlying metric. Take power, for example. The C706 might give you 3-second power, average power, normalised power, balance and so forth but Garmin adds 10-second and 30-second variants, watts/kg versions, lap versions, last-lap versions, %FTP and numerous cycling-dynamics derivatives. On top of that, Garmin offers a host of proprietary interpretive metrics, such as training readiness, Grit, Flow, Stamina, Training Effect and Performance Condition. Magene’s metrics are best summed up as comprehensive, whereas Garmin’s are exhaustive.

Surprisingly, one area in which the C706 is lacking is e-bike support. It had no issue identifying the integrated power meter on my Specialized Creo, yet it failed to report e-bike battery level, assist mode, remaining battery range or any motor-related data. I understand this omission is common across all e-bike systems, whether you’re running a Bosch, TQ, Shimano STEPS, Yamaha, Mahle or whatever.

Support for other ‘sensors’ over ANT+ and Bluetooth 5.0 protocols is solid. Power meters, cadence sensors, radar, smart lights, Di2 and eTap are all catered for. You can even monitor and control a paired DJI or Insta360 action camera with the C706.

Unsurprisingly, the C706 reports outputs from Magene’s own range of power meters and communicates with third-party products – including Garmin Rally and Favero Assioma pedals. If you’re using these pedals (I wasn’t) the C706, in common with many other bike computers, will display Power Phase (where in the pedal stroke each leg produces positive power), Standing vs Seated Time and Platform Center Offset.

The C706 can also act as a hub for compatible ANT+ bike lights, displaying their battery status and allowing lighting modes – solid, flash and so on – to be controlled from the head unit. My light network included a radar smart light, which introduced a major niggle for me. Many head units display the radar lane as a high-contrast solid bar at the edge of the screen. The C706’s lane is a trail of light grey chevrons, which are barely perceptible on most data screens and next to invisible on the map screen. Regardless of whether I was riding in bright sunshine or late-evening summer twilight, I couldn’t reliably make out the lane or the vehicle icons within it. Hopefully, Magene will re-think radar implementation in future firmware updates.

Unfortunately, my radar experiences highlighted another issue with the C706. The speaker is beautifully integrated into the alloy mounting boss, which is aesthetically pleasing but acoustically dumb. The speaker’s output – radar warnings, navigation prompts, bike bell and more – is muffled by the handlebar mount, making it difficult to hear in traffic, even with the volume manually turned up to 11. Voice commands become mumbled, and shrill alerts take on the soft, somniferous quality of meditation chimes.

At least the touchscreen is excellent. Well mostly. It cannot compete with the Edge 1050 for brightness, but I found it plenty legible enough under bright August skies. Colours are vibrant, contrast is good, and I didn’t find its comparatively low resolution a concern. Text and map renderings remain crisp, if not pin sharp.

The display is also fast and responsive, reacting quickly to prods and swipes from my forefinger. Sadly, Magene has shot itself in the foot with the TFT LCD screen, which on my test unit appeared completely black when viewed through polarised lenses. This is a massive issue for the many cyclists who’ve invested a large sum in polarised riding glasses. According to UK distributor Chicken Cycle, this doesn’t affect all units uniformly, with some more visible than others depending on the angle of view (the nature of polarisation).

Provided you can see the C706’s display, navigation is mostly painless and dependable, especially with imported routes. With 3.3in of screen real estate and the inevitable bulk that goes with it, this is a computer that holds more appeal for leisure and endurance riders than crit racers, so it should excel at nav. Mapping is clear and uncluttered, and directions unambiguous, making routes largely effortless to follow.

Creating those routes, however, does take a little effort. You can’t search for a destination address on the C706, this has to be entered into the OnelapFit app and the ride initiated from there. The route will then be imported across to the C706, which can take a few minutes.

You can, however, save locations – home, favourite cafes and so on – within OnelapFit and sync them over Bluetooth. The C706 populates a library of these ‘Frequent Locations’, which can be navigated to from anywhere within your current mapping region. In my experience, the C706 will only calculate one route option. If you deviate from it, the head unit will try to bring you back on course, but it doesn’t give you the luxury of several route options from the get-go. The route is not editable either.

I found routing and re-routing idiosyncratic. Often, the C706 would route me down major A-roads rather than more cycle-friendly B-roads, yet it would also plunder the bridlepath network – legally rideable offroad tracks in the UK – with carefree abandon. An unwelcome segment on a road bike ride. Re-routing, if I lost my way, was also somewhat haphazard, and prone to occasional failure.

Within OnelapFit it is also possible to create routes by converting previous rides, selecting multiple points on the app’s map – exasperating on a smartphone screen – and importing GPX files. Routes can also be automatically synced from both Strava and Komoot.

Frankly, I rarely need routes developed on the fly, preferring to import pre-planned GPX files authored in software such as OS Maps. I also use Komoot – which integrates with OnelapFit – a lot, especially for overseas trips. Until the C706’s routing matures, I recommend you do the same; Komoot gets the vote for best routing planning in CW's Cycling's Best Apps guide.

Mapping does include street names, which are often quoted in turn-by-turn voice and screen prompts. In short, navigation is solid, provided you import GPX files or use a third-party service.

Magene’s ClimbPro feature is clearly inspired by Garmin’s live climb profile tool of the same name. It works when following a route or in FreeRide mode, i.e. not following a route. Ride within 100 metres of a meaningful slope, and a ClimbPro popup displays a colour-coded elevation profile of the climb, showing your position on it alongside current gradient, distance remaining and remaining ascent. It also provides headline climb information such as total length, average gradient and elevation gain, helping you judge how hard the effort is and pace it accordingly.

In FreeRide mode, the C706 will detect and serve up profiles shortly before an ascent starts to bite, or budding KOM and QOM hunters can seek them out from a list of ‘Nearby Climbs’. This list can be filtered by Cat 4, 3, 2 and so on.

There are a couple of limitations. If you’re following a route, the ClimbPro profile popup is restricted to climbs on that route. Secondly, ascents must be at least 400m long and have a gradient of 2.5% or more. Be aware that many hills in the UK tend to be punchy but short, so they fail to meet these criteria.

I find climb profile tools genuinely useful, whether that be Garmin’s ClimbPro or Wahoo’s Summit. Magene’s ClimbPro is similarly gratifying. Up until recently, users complained about inaccuracies and inconsistencies, but Magene ironed out these buggy behaviours with firmware release v1.970.

A large part of Garmin’s appeal – and Wahoo’s, for that matter – is its mature training and wellness ecosystem. Although some of Garmin’s more advanced training features sit behind its Connect+ subscription, there is still plenty available for free. Magene’s offer is more basic, but it does cover the essentials. OnelapFit provides Free Training for indoor smart-trainer control, with the choice of Target Power, Resistance Level or Grade Level; structured Workouts can be created in the app or imported from TrainingPeaks; and Simulated Routes allow a compatible trainer to recreate the changing gradients of a chosen course.

What’s missing is the deeper coaching layer offered by Garmin, such as adaptive training plans, suggested workouts and more sophisticated physiological analysis.

Finally, battery life. This is always tricky to evaluate because so much depends on temperature and the number and variety of sensors connected. My C706 was only exhausted after a respectable 20 hours of riding. This was in high summer, with ambient temperatures in the region of 24 – 32°C (75.2–89.6°F). Radar and power meters were always connected. This is impressively close to Magene’s claimed 17 – 25-hour range. Charging from 20-percent battery to full took about an hour and forty minutes.

Value

Well, is the Magene C706 a Garmin Edge 1050 killer, a slayer of Wahoo Elemnt bike computers? No, but I believe it is one of the most significant GPS head unit launches of recent years. In terms of hardware and build quality, Magene has very nearly achieved parity with the big three. Only the silly polarised lens issue and speaker placement let it down.

When it comes to UI and software, it falls short. Way short when I consider just how deep Garmin’s training and wellbeing ecosystem is. Yet, for many cyclists – those who have little interest in training routines, sleep patterns and a thousand and one metrics – none of that matters.

What does matter is price and value. Price is fixed; value depends on how much of a power user you are (or have pretensions of becoming). If your requirements sit at the upper end of modest – decent nav, connectivity to radar, power, a bell etc – then you’ll be delighted with the C706. My only real gripes are poor radar integration and somewhat unreliable onboard nav routing and re-routing. Hopefully, these will both be addressed in future firmware updates.

Currently, the Garmin Edge 1050 retails for £599.99/$699.99, the Hammerhead Karoo for £449.99/$525 and the Wahoo Elemnt Roam 3 for £399.99/$449.99. The Magene C706 retails for £239/$229. I’ll leave you to do the maths.

Specs

• Price: £239/$229.
• Screen Size: 3.3 inches
• Weight: 111g (verified)
• Waterproof: IPX7
• Charging Port: USB-C
• Battery Life: 17-25 hours claimed, which is plausible
• Storage: 8gb

Who doesn’t love a metal bike?

With the release of the latest Cannondale CAAD earlier this year, I got curious about who else is doing interesting things with aluminium. Not simply a more affordable copy of a carbon bike model, but bikes designed specifically around the material.

California-based BlackHeart Bicycle Company is one of those brands. They bypass carbon altogether in favour of aluminium and titanium only.

These aren’t budget bikes either. They’re performance-oriented metal bikes, available as framesets or custom builds, with clean aesthetics and a cool, L.A. vibe.

There aren’t many brands leaning into aluminium these days, as the material has a reputation (not unjustified) for being stiff and harsh. But alloy bikes have long proven they can perform, and the Cannondale CAAD and Specialized Allez Sprint have long been popular in the crit scene.

But what about long days in the saddle? Or rides that mix pavement with dirt?

That’s where BlackHeart’s newest model, the Road Plus, is meant to shine. BlackHeart calls it the "evolution of the endurance road bike," pairing road-first handling with light gravel capability.

I received a frameset in "Lunar Frost" silver and built it up to the nines with a SRAM Red AXS road groupset, an ENVE cockpit to match the ENVE In-Route fork, and I even splurged on a few blingy bits from Wolf Tooth. The build is completed with ENVE SES 4.5 wheels – with Wolf Tooth’s new hubs – wrapped in 38mm Schwalbe Pro One tyres.

About BlackHeart

BlackHeart has a little of that LA cool about it. A name with a punk rock edge, clean aesthetics, and vibe-y marketing. At the same time, there’s a playful streak. Bikes aren’t meant to be taken so seriously, and they’re certainly not meant to sit looking pretty in a garage.

Founder Zach Lambert is big on that last part, especially.

"You can have the fastest bike in the world, but it doesn't matter if it sits in your garage."

He has a lot of opinions and interest in geometry, fit and sizing, but keeps coming back to the same point: the best bike for you is the one that makes you excited to go out and ride.

"Get the bike, get the colour, get whatever spec that you're stoked on," he told Cycling Weekly.

Personality plays a big part for BlackHeart. When the brand launched, I clearly remember it standing out for offering its titanium frames with custom-painted forks. Custom Cerakote paint remains an option for all its models, adding a little individual expression to those otherwise restrained designs. Beyond colour, you can opt to fully customise your build during the buying process, from paint and drivetrain to crank length, bottom bracket options and tyres.

Colour aside, Lambert set out to "make bikes for the 90%." Riders chasing their friends, exploring back roads on the weekends and squeezing a ride into a busy day.

"Let's make bikes that are kind of a little more timeless in their design so that they don't look outdated in a few years," he said. "Let's make bikes that are simple so that in three or four years, when they stop making the special shaped seat post, your bike’s not obsolete. Bikes that use universal standards and you can get a part for anywhere in the world. And frames that won’t end up in landfill."

In short, a bike you intend to ride a lot and keep for a while. Not one you’ll replace the moment a new model year comes out.

And that brings us to the Road Plus AL.

Meet the Road Plus AL

BlackHeart pitches the Road Plus AL at 70% road, 30% gravel. By comparison, BlackHeart’s Allroad model is made for 50% road and 50% gravel yet has a slightly narrower tyre cleance: 700 x 40 (or 650v x 50) vs the Road Plus' 700 x 42.

Looking at the geometry, the two bikes are closer than those road-to-gravel percentages might suggest. In size 46, the Road Plus has a shorter top tube and a longer head tube, yet stack and reach are almost identical. Its slightly slacker head angle might suggest slower steering, but the extra fork offset largely counteracts that. With the same chainstay length and just 4mm between their wheelbases, they are more similar than not.

Where the Road Plus’s more road-focused identity comes through is in its aero shaping, full cable integration and commitment to 700c wheels and electronic-only drivetrains.

The frame is made from double-butted 6066 aluminium, with a gently sloping top tube and dropped, curved seatstays. Those stays are part of BlackHeart’s answer to aluminium’s reputation for a punishing ride. The kammtail downtube and fully integrated cable routing bring a little aero ambition to the mix.

Lambert’s preference for common standards is seen in the threaded T47 bottom bracket, a round 31.6mm seatpost and a UDH derailleur hanger. There are also fender mounts, which I, as a Pacific Northwesterner, appreciate.

The AL comes in eight sizes, from 46cm to 62cm. Stock colours are Lunar Frost, Frozen Berry and Dark Magic, with custom paint available in the U.S.

Build options & pricing

The Road Plus AL frameset starts at $1,699 / €1.502 and includes the ENVE In-Route fork, seatpost and headset.

Complete builds start at $3,549 / €3.138 for SRAM Rival AXS XPLR and run up to $7,449 / €6585 for Red AXS XPLR, with Hunt carbon wheels in the listed builds.

The ride

There’s something about a good aluminium bike that makes me want to get out of the saddle and stomp on the pedals for no particularly good reason. The Road Plus is no different. Put some effort into the pedals and it responds with an immediacy that makes it difficult to leave a perfectly sensible steady pace alone.

One of the first outings on this bike was a Thursday night group ride that, according to my ride file, was 67% paved and 33% unpaved. Pretty close to the brief, then.

It was a social pace on the pavement, but the legs – and those 38mm slicks – got tested on the gravel. The unpaved section includes some narrow singletrack and even a tiny rock garden. I had to be on my toes, but I was grinning from ear to ear. This was pushing the Road Plus beyond its intended use, but it handled it just fine. I even came away with the W in the sprint finish to the designated dive bar.

Sometimes, bikes in the endurance or all-road category prioritise stability and comfort to the point that the ride feels a little dull. The Road Plus keeps things interesting. It’s no crit machine, but it has the liveliness that I look for. Its capacity for long days and dirt detours hasn’t dulled that road-bike feel.

The weight is respectable, too. With all its fancy parts attached, my build came out to 18.2lb (8.26kg) ready to ride. That includes bottle cages, a computer mount, sealant and even Wahoo Speedplay pedals. Pretty good for an aluminium bike with 38mm tyres. Granted, the SRAM Red AXS drivetrain and ENVE components help, but the frame clearly isn’t holding this build back.

It looks the part, too. The silver frame, tucked-away cables, deep wheels and little flashes of colour make for a real head-turner.

Comfort was perhaps the biggest question for me, given aluminium’s reputation for harshness. I was worried my back would have something to say about 70-plus miles with 30 miles of gravel thrown in. But, with high volume tyres and a good set of wheels, the anticipated punishment never really arrived.

Those high-volume tyres deserve some credit. How much comes from the frame, fork or wheels is harder to untangle, but the complete package works very well. There’s enough comfort for a long day and enough feedback and response to keep that day interesting.

It’s also a versatile bike. Gravel bros might scoff at the 42mm tyre limit, and roadies will want something more single-minded about speed. Fair enough. But for my mix of riding, the Road Plus AL ticks the boxes.

I’ve long been a proponent of the modern allroad category. These are the bikes I think more of us should be riding. Race bikes are fun, no doubt, but their priorities don’t match the riding we actually do. I want a bike that keeps me comfortable over cracked city streets and chipsealed farm roads, lets me push the pace without forcing myself into an uncomfortable position, and leaves room for a dirt-road detour when the route looks too good to pass up.

There are even fender mounts there should you want to use the bike as a super commuter or winter road bike (note: the clearance drops down to 35mm with fenders).

For my mix of gravel, rough city pavement, farm roads and the occasional questionable route choices, the Road Plus AL is an underbiker’s delight. It can hang on the group ride, carry me comfortably across mixed-terrain adventures and doesn’t ask to be babied.

Value and verdict

The BlackHeart Road Plus AL has few direct competitors. The ones that come to mind are all alloy copies of carbon siblings, often built with entry-level components and aimed at a budget-conscious consumer or beginner. BlackHeart gives it rather more attention than that.

Of the bikes I’ve ridden in recent years, the Specialized Crux DSW is perhaps the closest comparison in terms of versatility, the case it makes for a quality aluminium frame and price. The Crux DSW frameset retails at $1,799. It’s primarily a gravel bike, but it has very good N-1 potential. Road, gravel, cyclocross, commuting - it does it all, and it does it well.

The Road Plus AL is similar in that regard but has the edge on the Crux DSW when it comes to road riding. It feels livelier and snappier. And, with its tucked-away cables and aero shaping, it looks the part, too.

If your riding will be more gravel than road, then the Crux DSW’s 47cm tyre clearance will be more appealing. Still, for light gravel and mixed terrain jaunts, the 42mm tyre clearance suits me fine.

The price won’t suit anyone who expects aluminium to mean cheap, but at $1,699 for the frameset, including the ENVE In-Route fork (a $625 value), seatpost and headset, it’s an appealing starting point for a quality bike you plan to make your own.

There’s also something to be said for riding a bike that isn’t already under half the group. Liking the look of your bike counts for something, and BlackHeart’s paint and build options give you plenty of scope to make it uniquely yours.

I’ve long been of the opinion that a good aluminium frame with a quality build can rival a carbon frame with a lesser build. Save your pennies on the frameset and spend them on nice parts instead. The Road Plus AL makes a very good case for that approach, even if I got a little carried away with the rest of the shopping list.

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

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 (306g 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: 306g per shoe (actual, size EU44)
• Outsole: Carbon fibre
• Retention: Twin Boa (habu) Li2
• Colours: 3
• Sizes: EU36-47 (including limited half sizes)