As an owner of many nice bikes, Sydney-based rider Peter Howie is insistent on one selection criteria: Each new bike has to be noticeably different than the last. Coming back from a separated clavicle, Howie’s custom Mosaic just didn’t fit him the same anymore, and so, the quest for the next perfect bike restarted. There was already a very light Cannondale CAAD12 Disc, a Spooky, and the Mosaic in the fleet, so why not try a carbon bike again?

I caught up with Howie and the bike’s builder, Zak Smiley of Skunkworks, at the Makers Show in Sydney, this past weekend. Shot in a gloomy inner-city alleyway, the custom Parlee is a contrast to the beat-up commuters, rubbish bins, and old cars that fill the gutters.

Why Parlee and why custom?

Options for full-custom carbon bikes may not be plentiful, but the breadth of choice is growing. Amongst those options, many of which have popped up within the last handful of years, there’s the veteran, Parlee. Having been in operation since 2000, it’s hard to argue with the experience the Massachusetts-based carbon frame maker has earned.

“I haven’t had a carbon bike in a long time,” said Howie, who is now an ambassador for the Parlee brand. “I’ve known Zak for a while and he’s had a couple of Parlees, and he’s always been a raving fan. I did my research; I really like the fact they make their own tubing. They’re still a relatively boutique operation, but operating at a larger level than a lot of others.

Only in the right light do you know it’s a Parlee.

“What motivated me to get another custom bike is that when I had the Mosaic built, I’d had an injury, a separated clavicle, so when I had the bike fit, I felt like I was more recovered than I actually was. I love the bike, but it’s a little too upright. There were a few things that came through in the fit because of my lack of flexibility at that stage. Through the learnings of that, I knew what I wanted. The things that worked really well, I wanted to replicate, but also fix the issues that were there in the last bike.”

Having owned a number of custom bikes, Howie holds some expensive experience. “That’s the challenge with custom. You’ve really got to be comfortable, and I guess the challenge is how long you ride; your position changes. Especially after an accident, and an injury, it can completely change your position on the bike.

“I guess the thing with custom is being honest. A lot of people try to get the bike that they think they want, rather than get the bike that actually suits them. I know what my strengths are, and I know what my weaknesses are on a bike. I’m not a climber, so weight was really never a first priority with it. I wanted something that was stiff, gave me good power transfer, but really was made for longer rides, with a degree of climbing, but I’m not going to be taking it to Europe.

“It was made for Sydney riding, doing Four Gorges [an iconic Sydney loop involving a number of climbs through the Ku-ring-gai National Park] and stuff like that.”

In Howie’s case, knowing his geometry, the type of bike he wanted, and then the maker, the bike came together quickly. For Parlee, 80% of their current business is in stock bikes, but it’s the full-custom program, such as that offered with the Z-Zero Disc, that the brand is best known for.

“The process was really good,” Howie said. “Talking with Kim that handles distribution with Parlee was great; there was a lot of back-and-forth with him, in terms of tube selection, fit, and things like that. There’s a real mix with this bike: seatstays, chainstays are basically all their stiffest tubing, where the down tube, top tube, and seat tube have a lot more compliance. You can really feel that in the bike.”

The choice of brakes does affect other aspects of the build. Go too short on the chainstays, and heel rub from the wider-set wheel can be an issue.

While this wasn’t Howie’s first disc-equipped road bike, it was his first custom road disc bike. And that brought a few unexpected changes to his initial wishlist.

“A lot of the things I gave to them (Parlee), they turned around and said, ‘Look, this is a disc bike, so you are asking for things that are a little different.’ A lot of that was the geometry. I started with the Mosaic geometry and changed it to fit my current (lower) position. They came back, suggesting longer chainstays due to the discs, but also [changes to suit my] riding position.”

“I work with Tom Petty from Pave the Way Bike Fitters; Tom knows me inside and out. He knows my position when I sit when I’m climbing, when I’m sprinting, all sorts of different conditions. So looking at that, Parlee suggested changes for where my balance was a little more forward over the bike. They were really good like that and considered the way I ride, not just the way I thought I rode.

“Seeing how they work, they’ve delivered in what they’ve said in terms of time frames, and communication has been great,“ Howie said, before Smiley added, “In a way where many others boutique makers struggle.” All up, Howie had his frame within eight weeks of ordering it. “It’s amazingly quick for a custom carbon bike.”

That 3K theme…

The bike industry once finished seemingly every carbon fibre frame with a 3K woven outer layer to highlight the material, but more structurally efficient unidirectional layers have since taken over. However, this Parlee shows a clear homage to the woven look.

A close look at the frame reveals patches of 3K weave.

When asked about the 3K theme and the patches of it throughout the frame, Howie admitted it was a custom request, with Smiley laughing about the question. “I wanted the 3K theme going through the bike. We actually considered doing the whole bike in 3K but it would have added an extra 600g,” Howie admitted, with Smiley adding, “Because it’s entirely cosmetic. Wrapping it on the lugs is one thing, but they don’t use 3K tubing. It would have added a massive amount of weight, and cost, for no gain.”

“I like the 3K,” Howie said. “I’m 41 years old, and I remember it from F1, and it’s a bit nostalgic for me having the 3K. It’s not everyone’s cup of tea, but I think it kinda works.”

The chosen appearance also made Howie’s paint choice easier, with a subtle pearl clear coat and stealth logos that, on close inspection — or in the right light — show the material beneath. “The workmanship on the Parlees is that good,” said Smiley, “that to go slather it in paint and not be able to see it is selling it short.”

A bike for Sydney

On first inspection, you’d be forgiven for assuming Howie is a loyal gram counter. I did. And I was proven wrong. For Howie, his key priority in a bike is always reliability — he’s going to ride the thing, and Sydney roads can be a little, well, less than ideal. And in the case of his Parlee, there’s an element of aesthetics, too, such as the choice of Mcfk components (with more of that 3K finish).

Schmolke wheels may seem like a fair-weather weight-weenie choice, but with clincher tyres and disc brakes, such a rim can be used daily.

Howie admits that Smiley, a notorious tinkerer and connoisseur of boutique parts, had a fair amount of say in the build.

“Zak builds my wheels; he’s built six sets for me,” he said. “I look a lot to him for advice. I guess with Zak, I’m perhaps his guinea pig; we do a lot of stuff on the bleeding edge. We’ve tested certain brands in the past and we’ve had issues in terms of quality. We’ve got the Schmolke carbon rims on these, and they’re fantastic. They’re a great wheelset.”

Howie’s bike is built with a fair number of ultralight components that you’ll only ever hear spoken of on the Weight Weenies forum, but it’s fair to say the bike hasn’t been compromised in the pursuit of grams. Surprisingly, there was also a limit on budget – one that was higher than what would be available for many, but a limit nonetheless.

“For example, the other crank option would have been the new carbon SRM,” explained Smiley, “but it’s three times the price, when the Quarq does exactly the same job.”

Made in Italy, the Carbon-Ti brake rotors feature a semi-floating steel braking surface that’s attached to a carbon carrier with titanium rivets. A pair of these saves approximately 50g over SRAM’s lightest offering.

Smiley did admit that perhaps the one questionable piece of weight-saving was the Carbon-Ti disc rotors, but so far, Howie is happy with the performance on tap, and Sydney’s hills rarely go beyond 200m elevation.

The complete bike (as pictured) is said to weight 6.7kg (14.77lb) – an excellent but not extraordinary figure for a disc-equipped bike running fairly normal 25c tyres and 45mm deep wheels, not-all-that-light shifting components, and a powermeter.

How’s the ride?

Having now had the bike for a month, Howie jokes that he’s shelved all his other bikes. One upcoming final fitting remains, after which the final touches will be added: Busyman custom leather bar tape, and one last trim on the steerer tube. Howie may not consider the bike to be totally finished, but few others would likely see it that way, and the ride quality is the same regardless.

“It’s the only bike I’ve been riding, apart from my trainer bike,” he said. “There’s nothing I want to change. Perhaps the Mcfk saddle, but it’s just a matter of getting used to it; it’s an unusual shape. It was picked for aesthetics and weight, but that’s the only component I’d consider swapping.

“I like the fact that every bike I’ve owned is different. And with every bike, you can tell what it does well and what it doesn’t. I like the fact you can pick the bike to the ride. This one just does everything so well. It’s a cliché, but it just does.

“It’s like driving a Lexus: everything just happens. You put the power down, but you don’t feel it going down. Compared to my other bikes, such as the Spooky, which is a lot rawer, you just feel everything. Everything that goes into it, you just feel. The Parlee kinda absorbs it and puts it through, which is an odd sensation.

“I’ve had bikes that have been a bit noodly in the past, which make you feel like you’re losing the effort, but here you still get it and you’re getting your watts through, but you just don’t feel it. You can still feel the road, you’re still connected, but when you put the power down, it’s a weird sensation. It’s a very impressive bike.”

“That’s high-end carbon,” Smiley added. “It’s a material that allows you to tune in all the characteristics without compromise. I’ve owned a few Parlees and they do have a beautiful soft feel; they turn everything to butter, but you’re not losing anything in the process. It’s unusual.”

The build

Frame: Custom Parlee Z-Zero Disc
Fork: Parlee Road Disc, 1 1/4in tapered steerer
Headset: Cane Creek Slamset
Wheels: Schmolke SL 45 carbon rims, Extralite CyberDisc hubs, Sapim CX-Ray spokes. Built by Skunkworks
Tyres: Pirelli P Zero 25c
Groupset: SRAM Red eTap HRD
Crankset: Quarq D-Zero powermeter
Chainrings: Praxis Works Buzz, 53/39T
Chain: KMC X11SL gold
Bottom Bracket: Kogel Ceramic EVO386 30mm
Brake Rotors: Carbon-Ti Floating, Tune Titanium bolts
Handlebar: Mcfk, 42cm
Stem: WR Compositi, 110mm, 3K weave
Seatpost: Mcfk 31.6mm
Saddle: Mcfk Leather
Bartape: Lizard Skins DSP (for now)
Pedals: Speedplay Pave Ti
Bottle Cages: Fairwheel Bikes Gloss 3K
Extras: Parlee carbon front derailleur clamp, Extralite chainring bolts, Extralite Blacklock thru-axles, Fetha computer mount, Skunkworks #Tidylight mount for Exposure, Skunkworks custom BlackTi bolt kit
Weight: 6.7kg as pictured.

Surely this counts as a super bike?

The SRAM Red eTap’s wireless design affords a clean aesthetic. This frame is wireless only, with no ports for other drivetrains.

The ghosted logos are only visible in certain light.

Another look at that 3K finish. (Serial number barcode smudged in Photoshop).

Like many modern disc road bikes, Parlee routes the front hose through the fork.

The Z-Zero Disc claims to fit up to 32c tyres. Howie’s build appears to be a little tighter, but certainly 28c tyres could work if wanted.

The rear brake hose is guided through the frame and exits near the brake caliper.

More 3K.

Just a single hose enters the frame.

WR Compositi is another Italian-made name that will be new to many. The brand features on this bike just once.

Mcfk is a German brand that specialises in impressively lightweight composites. Arguably, many of the Mcfk parts were picked because of the 3K weave aesthetic, a finish that now appears to be discontinued.

Cane Creek’s new Slamset headset was picked to help exaggerate the slammed affect. This headset features a reduced-height bearing and top cover to squeeze out a few additional millimetres.

More Mcfk components. Howie loves the bike, but isn’t totally sure about this 100g leather-covered carbon saddle.

Made in Italy, these Extralite Disc hubs feature straight-pull spoke flanges.

They’re laced to a pair of Schmolke SL 45 rims.

The Parlee Z-Zero Disc uses a BB386 press-fit bottom bracket. A Kogel Ceramic bottom bracket is pressed into the hollow shell.

The Parlee Z-Zero Disc is built with 142x12mm thru-axle dropouts and flat-mount brakes.

Not a wire in sight.

More Slamset action from Cane Creek.

A regular SRAM Red 22 cassette is used out back. It’s a lightweight cassette, but if Howie were really chasing grams, he would have picked something else.

It’s hard to miss that gold KMC chain. It’s somewhat of a signature in many of Smiley’s builds at Skunkworks.

Religious cross or Speedplay Pave Ti pedals?

#BAAGD (garage door).

The post Bikes of the Bunch: Parlee Z-Zero Disc appeared first on CyclingTips.

Who says high-end cross-country hardtails are dead? While lightweight full-suspension rigs are becoming more common on the World Cup circuit, they still can’t match a good hardtail for pure climbing speed, and Cannondale has just announced the second generation of its F-Si carbon thoroughbred.

Claimed weight on the top-end Hi-Mod version drops to a staggering 900g — 80g lighter than its predecessor — while the standard-modulus version is still just 1,100g for a medium size. The new F-Si is supposedly more durable, too, and now uses proportional tubing diameters for a more consistent ride quality across the size range. The seatstays have also gotten smaller, the chainstays are now more tapered, and the newly internal seatpost binder creates longer effective seatpost extensions for a given saddle height, all of which promise a smoother ride as well (for a hardtail, that is). Cannondale has even gone with a road-specific flat-mount rear disc-brake caliper so the seatstay has more freedom to move.

Carrying over is Cannondale’s unusual Ai asymmetric frame design, which offsets the chainring and the entire Boost 148 rear wheel 3mm to the driveside. According to Cannondale, this allows the frame to fit tires up to 2.35″-wide while still maintaining ultra-short 427mm chainstays — 3mm shorter than Specialized’s latest Epic Hardtail. The proprietary layout will invariably give some people fits, but the design is at least compatible with most standard 148mm-wide Boost rear wheels, and the readjusted dish will actually make for more symmetrical spoke angles.

Frame geometry has been more drastically changed, with longer front-centers and slacker head tube angles for more confident high-speed descending, while increased fork offsets keep the trail dimensions reasonable to maintain good low-speed agility — not unlike what has long been happening with trail and enduro bikes in recent years.

Fork travel is pegged at an XC-friendly 100mm courtesy of Cannondale’s radical new Lefty Ocho fork, which uses the same unusual single-sided design of other Leftys, but now sports a single crown. Cannondale hasn’t gone after the lightweight title with the Lefty Ocho, and indeed, at 1,446g for the carbon version, and 1,735g for the aluminum one, it’s at least 100g or so heavier than a RockShox SID World Cup or Fox 32 Step-Cast. Instead, the Lefty Ocho supposedly offers superior fore-aft and lateral rigidity despite the missing leg, along with the much-improved small-bump sensitivity that comes with the fork’s three-sided needle-bearing internal design in lieu of conventional solid bushings.

Inside the fork is a new OppO air spring with self-adjusting positive and negative chambers for a more supple feel and easier setup, and adjustable air volume for tunable spring rate progression. Nestled inline with the OppO is a new Chamber oil damper, with adjustable low-speed compression and rebound adjustments, plus a remote lockout. Easing the hassle of initial setup are printed-on air pressure recommendations and sag markers on the back of the plastic stanchion guard.

A new quick-release disc-brake mount will make it easier to get the front wheel off than before, too, and the F-Si’s rear dropouts switch to Mavic’s SpeedRelease design for faster wheel changes back there, too.

Cannondale will offer the new F-Si in seven complete builds, ranging from US$2,200 to US$9,000, and more detailed information can be found at cannondale.com. We’ve got a test sample inbound, so stay tuned for an in-depth review.

The post Cannondale unveils redesigned F-Si hardtail and radical Lefty Ocho suspension fork appeared first on CyclingTips.

Time and tide wait for no one, as the saying goes, and as we head into the meat of the 2018 product launch cycle, I can’t help but marvel at how far bikes have come. Road frames are lighter, more efficient, more aerodynamic, and more comfortable than ever. Bikes are more versatile and capable than they’ve ever been. The continuing infusion of advanced electronics into mechanical systems has produced better drivetrains than Tullio Campagnolo could ever possibly have imagined. Disc brakes are finally starting to overtake rim brakes, and one of the first questions people ask when investigating a new bike is, “how big a tire can I fit in there?”

The sea is changing, indeed.

But yet as incredible as all this new stuff is, the bigger question remains: Are the improvements significant enough to justify replacing your old bike?

Much of the marketing hype out there certainly would suggest as much. Your current bike has round tubes and a frame that weighs over 800g? There are braided cables connecting the shifters and derailleurs? And blocks of rubber clamping down on — gasp — metal rims??? The horror.

While it’s my job to keep up to date on the latest and greatest, I’m personally not so sure how much of the new technology on the road front carries sufficient benefits to justify replacing old with new.

A ride down memory lane

Thirteen years ago, I had a red-and-black LeMond Maillot Jaune that I absolutely adored. The Reynolds 853 lower “spine,” as LeMond called it, was meant to give the bike the springy ride quality of steel, while the frame’s molded carbon fiber upper section reduced the overall weight relative to an all-chromoly frame, and also added torsional rigidity.

It was a lovely bike to ride, and I kept it for several years. It even made the move with me from flat Michigan to mountainous Colorado. I eventually sold it after finally admitting to myself that it was one size too big, but I always regretted doing so.

A few months ago, I found a used Maillot Jaune frameset on eBay. It clearly had had a rough life. The paint was in bad shape, someone had cut the steerer tube far too short to be safe with any stem, and the base of the seat tube slot had a small crack in it. But it was the right size and vintage, and nostalgia is one of those things that defies common sense.

I bought it immediately.

A straight 1 1/8″ steerer tube with external, press-in headset cups? It’s a wonder this bike still functions at all.

I began to question, though, if my pleasant memories of that bike were a matter of absence making the heart grow fonder. Was the bike really that nice to ride, or did I just make it out that way in my mind? There was only one way to find out.

I gathered up a modern Campagnolo Chorus mechanical groupset, some older Campagnolo Shamal Mille aluminum clinchers, a cool old Rotor S1 machined aluminum stem, and a Selle Italia SLR Monolink saddle and carbon fiber seatpost that the company had printed with my name on it years ago as some sort of marketing promotion. I wrapped the wheels with a pair of 26mm-wide Specialized Turbo Cotton tires (some of the best available, in my opinion), wrapped a Bontrager RXL IsoZone handlebar with some Arundel Gecko Grip tape (in gleaming white to match the saddle), and fitted some new Time road pedals.

I have a rule about never riding used carbon fiber forks of unknown history, so even if the steerer had been sufficiently long, there was never a question as to whether I would one the fork that came with the frame. Finding a suitable replacement proved challenging, but Bicycling Magazine test director Matt Phillips miraculously came through with a period-correct Reynolds Ouzo Pro — with the correct rake.

All told, the bike came out to a reasonable 7.78kg (17.15lb), including pedals and accessories — not far behind modern stuff, despite the comparatively weighty frame. Needless to say, I was dying to ride it.

The burden of unrealistic expectations

That day finally came not long ago, on a gorgeously sunny spring day with calm winds, clean roads, and minimal traffic. After so many years of searching, would my memory serve correct, or would my hopes be dashed?

Before I get your hopes up, I will say right away that this is not a case of a 13-year-old bike being just as good as a brand-new one. While the supple tires make for a smooth ride on good tarmac, engineers have learned a lot about frame compliance during that period. The old LeMond chatters and crashes on anything bigger than road texture or pavement seams. Similarly, the tired steel-and-carbon frame cannot match the near-instantaneous snap under power of an ultra-stiff modern carbon chassis.

JRA with the Angry Asian: Does frame compliance still matter?

But you know what? This old frameset is rigid enough, it rides well enough, it still handles fantastically — road geometry has changed little in decades, after all — and with a contemporary build kit, it all functions just as well as a new bike. It isn’t substantially heavier, and as much as I adore disc brakes on the road most of the time, standard rim-brake pads bite plenty hard on the plasma electrolytic oxidation-treated sidewalls of the Campagnolo Shamal Mille wheels.

The jury is still out on whether stiffer frames are faster than more flexible ones, anyway, and despite the fact that this LeMond feels slower than other modern bikes I’ve ridden, I set a PR on a local climb while riding it. Take that, technology.

I’ve long held this belief that the strict limitations put in place by the UCI’s Lugano Charter in 1996 have stifled innovation on the road front. While bikes have continued to get progressively lighter, more aerodynamic, and better overall since then, we’re still talking about incremental changes over the course of more than two decades.

Aero, schmero. That said, frame designers of the era weren’t terribly adept at engineering comfort into bikes, either, and ride quality is definitely an area that has seen big improvements in recent years.

In comparison, mountain bikes have transformed several times over in that period, to the point where a top-end machine from just a few years ago is a very different animal to something available today, with radical changes in frame geometry, wheel sizes, and gearing just to name a few. I wouldn’t dare ride the trails I do now on the DeKerf Team SL steel hardtail that I absolutely cherished back in the day for fear of serious bodily harm, but this LeMond can still tackle the same paved roads and bring the same smile to my face.

It might take a bit longer to do so, mind you, but ultimately, the experience it provides isn’t all that different.

The point of diminishing returns

I’m not surprised that road bike sales have fallen flat in recent years. Perceptions about road safety likely have something to do with that, but there’s only so long that you can beat the same drum before you get tired of hearing the same song, over and over. Is this old LeMond remotely aero? Nope. In fact, its perfectly round tubing puts a big middle finger up to the wind — honey badger don’t care. Are there frames out there that weigh almost half as much? Yup. And is modern stuff more comfortable, more versatile, and stiffer, too? Yes, yes, and yes.

But that’s besides the point. Because the gains made in road bike technology have been so comparatively minute, and because road bikes are so incredibly refined already, bikes that are even a decade old or more are still pretty damned good. Do I love new bikes? You betcha. Are they better? Unquestionably so. But a 10-year-old frame that was cutting-edge back then is still plenty nice now, and it’s hard to argue when someone says their old stuff is good enough — because in many cases, it probably is.

Old high-quality frames may be able to keep up with new ones for the most part, but the gap between old and new parts is much bigger. I didn’t hesitate to throw a leg over a 13-year-old LeMond, but this modern Campagnolo Chorus groupset sure works better than the Shimano Dura-Ace 7800 stuff that originally came on this bike.

I’m not going to pretend that new bikes aren’t better than old ones, and if I were racing, by all means, I’d want every possible mechanical advantage I could find. And keep in mind that I’m mainly talking about frames; old parts definitely aren’t as good as the new stuff. But for riders who are mostly just out for fun, a new high-end road bike can be a tough sell, especially when it costs much less to just upgrade here and there.

I’ve been pretty amazed by the response I’ve gotten both on the road and in social media to my old Maillot Jaune. It seems I’m not the only one who remembers these things fondly. It might seem odd that someone with a rotating fleet of brand-new dream bikes at his disposal might go out of his way to find something old and tired, but it’s refreshing for me to remind myself just how good things have been, and important to maintain a sense of perspective.

I know there are other bikes that are “better” than this one. But bikes aren’t solely about going faster, and I’m not going to make the same mistake twice. This one’s a keeper.

The post JRA with the Angry Asian: The slow crawl of road bike progress appeared first on CyclingTips.

Love it or hate it, disc brakes on drop-bar bikes are here to stay. With all major drivetrain manufacturers now committed to the cause, and an increasing number of brands pushing the advanced braking system, there’s a high chance your next bike (or bike after that) will feature disc brakes. However, the number of advantages they offer do bring about a number of quirks and unique maintenance demands.

The same questions regularly appear with nearly every mention of disc-equipped bikes, so we figured it’s time to answer them. This article may not be the most exciting to read, but we hope it’s at least useful. Let us know if we missed anything; This is the endless FAQ to road disc brakes, after all, and despite the length, there’s always room to add more.

Key sections:

• The Basics
• Installation and buying basics
• Maintenance
• Traveling
• Troubleshooting issues

The Basics of Road Discs

What is a disc brake?

Disc brakes have been around on bicycles for a decent amount of time – as early as the 50s, in fact. Mountain biking really brought discs to popularity, and they’ve been the standard braking system there for nearly twenty years. But in terms of what makes them different, it’s really quite simple. Similar to the brakes found in modern cars or motorbikes, disc brakes move the braking surface from the rim to a dedicated metal (usually steel) rotor attached to the hub – that’s all.

In concept, disc-brake calipers aren’t all that different from rim-brake calipers, either, except that the caliper bodies are much smaller, and the pads are made of much harder materials than the various rubbery compounds used in rim brakes.

Mechanical versus hydraulic disc brakes: what’s the difference?

A mechanical disc brake uses a traditional brake lever, brake housing, and inner cable.

A mechanical disc brake is much like a traditional rim brake, using a standard road bike brake lever and cable that are connected to the brake caliper. When the lever is pulled, the cable actuates a piston that pushes a single brake pad, flexing the rotor enough for it to get squeezed between the moving brake pad and a fixed one. Some mechanical disc brakes, such as the TRP Spyre, work by pushing both brake pads simultaneously against the rotor.

A hydraulic brake (pictured at the top of the article) is more like what a modern car would use, where fluid is used to transfer force. Here, fluid is stored in a reservoir called the master cylinder, which resides inside the brake lever body. When the lever is pulled, it pushes fluid out of the master cylinder and through the brake hose to the caliper. That fluid then pushes the caliper pistons (to which the pads are attached) against either side of the rotor.

Why is hydraulic braking superior?

Mechanical brakes are highly reliable, however the cables and housing are less efficient at transferring power from the lever to the caliper, they’re more susceptible to contamination, and have to be manually adjusted as the pads wear.

By contrast, hydraulic disc brakes automatically compensate for pad wear, they’re generally lighter, and they’re fully sealed from the elements. Additionally, the hydraulic design produces less mechanical friction in the system, and impressive force amplification can be engineered in, too, meaning a light effort at the lever equates to a whole lot of braking force generated at the wheel.

Can I turn a mechanical brake lever into a hydraulic one?

They TRP Hy/Rd is one example of a hydraulic brake caliper that can be used with a mechanical lever.

Simply put, no. However, you can connect a mechanical brake lever to some hydraulic calipers. Options are limited for this, but both TRP and Yokozuna offer such a thing. Both of these feature a hydraulic caliper where the master cylinder is in the caliper body itself. Your mechanical brake lever pulls a mechanical cable, which pulls on the piston rod at the caliper. It’s still a compromise, with cable friction losses and increased weight as issues. But if you’re looking for improved braking performance on your mechanical disc-equipped bike, or looking to re-use some existing shifters on a new bike, it’s a viable option.

How much heavier is a disc-brake system?

This is a tough question.

Simply comparing something like the Shimano Dura-Ace R9100 brake levers and rim-brake calipers (including an approximate weight for cables) with the equivalent disc-brake system, you’ll see the disc brakes are approximately 200g heavier, accounting for cables, housing, and brake hoses.

However, disc-brake hubs are also heavier since they require interfaces for mounting the rotors, and disc-compatible wheels are also heavier since they have to handle more twisting loads. As a result, disc wheels are typically built with a higher spoke count, crossed spoke lacing and often thicker gauge spokes, too. Some of that can be offset with a lighter rim, since it no longer has to include a braking surface, but it’s still a net gain in mass.

Conversely, some – but not all – modern disc-compatible road frames are actually lighter than their rim-brake counterparts, but the stiffer thru-axles usually paired with them add some of that weight back. Overall, many top-tier brands claim the weight difference between rim-brake and disc-brake frames is between 30-90g.

Taking everything into account, you’re typically looking at a 300g disadvantage with disc brakes, and that’s really a best-case scenario. More often, and where stricter budgets are involved, the weight gain is typically closer to 500g (1.1lb).

That’s likely to change over the coming years, though. For example, there was a turning point for disc brakes in cross-country mountain bike racing about 15 years ago, where disc brakes as a complete system (including wheel weights) became lighter than equivalent rim-brake options. While we may never see that happen on the road side, for sure the gap will continue to narrow.

I can already lock up a wheel with rim brakes, so why should I even bother with discs?

Being able to lock a wheel is not a sign of great braking performance, and yes, ultimate braking power is dictated by the amount of traction your tires have on the road surface. However, disc brakes provide finer control of your braking power just before lock-up, which is where you get the most effective braking. Better known as modulation, this ability to more precisely apply the power reduces your braking distance. In a race, this allows you to brake later into corners and have the confidence to carry more speed out of them.

Those who ride in wet conditions will also benefit from improved braking confidence regardless of the weather, as well as reduced maintenance. Nearly all hydraulic disc brakes will automatically adjust to pad wear, and you won’t suffer from worn rims due to gritty braking.

Hydraulic disc brakes require less hand effort, too, meaning a single finger is often all that’s needed to keep your speed in check.

Enve’s SES 4.5 AR Disc rim is not only wider than its rim-brake counterpart, but it’s lighter, too.

Lastly, there are the engineering freedoms disc brakes bring. By removing the brake caliper from the fork crown or seatstay bridge, manufacturers have been able to greatly increase tyre clearance and improve frame compliance. Likewise, hydraulic disc brake lines can be routed with tighter bends than mechanical cables and housings, which greatly eases routing complications. Wheel manufacturers also have the potential to build lighter rims (although in practice, those differences are very minor at present).

But yes, there are notable disadvantages to disc brakes. They’re heavier, the initial setup is more complicated, and they have their own idiosyncrasies. And yes, the technology is currently more expensive.

Are disc brakes more or less aero than rim brakes?

Disc brakes alone are marginally less aero than rim brakes. However, a small number of bike brands, such as Giant with their Propel Disc, claim that by removing the clutter of rim brakes, the aero effects of a disc rotor can be balanced out.

More importantly, some of the fastest aero bikes have traditionally used rim brakes that perform with dubious quality, not to mention the fact that braking performance on carbon rims isn’t as good as on aluminium ones. Regardless, disc brakes are opening up possibilities for aero benefits elsewhere on the bike, and we’re only starting to learn how.

Can I race with disc brakes?

This still depends on your exact location, but the answer is more than likely yes. While disc brakes remain in a trial state for professionals, amateur racing is far more open. Disc brakes have been legal for use in United States amateur racing for a few years, while Cycling Australia allowed disc usage in July, 2017. And as of 2018, British Cycling allows the use of disc brakes in its governed events, too.

And for those looking to do Gran Fondos or similar, regardless of location, we’re not aware of any related bans.

Is the industry going to force us onto disc brakes?

Not as long as rim-brake bikes are still being sold. There’s no denying the trend toward disc brakes on road, and a few brands, such as Giant, have been extremely vocal in stating that rim-brake bikes have a limited lifespan.

Even if the big brands shift away from rim brakes, which will take a number of years, you’ll still be able to work with any number of custom builders, or smaller brands, to get a bike with rim brakes.

Yes, more and more disc-equipped options will become available over the next couple of years, and it’ll come at the cost of fewer and fewer rim-brake bikes. But if you’ve got a rim-brake bike now, or you’re looking to buy one, it won’t become obsolete any time soon.

Road Disc Installation and buying basics

Can I fit discs to an existing bike?

Neither traditional road hubs, nor frames, have provisions for adding discs.

Simply, no. Disc brake calipers require specific mounting points on the fork and frame, while the wheels need specific hubs onto which the rotor can be installed. While there were a handful of older (most cyclocross) bikes manufactured during the nascent days of disc brakes that could accept either format, the chance that you can install disc brakes to your existing rim-brake bike are extremely small.

If I imagine my wheel as a disc, surely I have disc brakes already, don’t I?

In theory, yes. However, the advantages of disc brakes lie not in the size of the rotor, but how efficiently force is transferred from the lever to the braking surface. The friction coefficients of carbon fibre and aluminium rims aren’t nearly as good as steel disc-brake rotors, and rim-brake calipers and housings are much more prone to power-robbing flex than compact hydraulic disc-brake calipers. Exceptions do exist, such as some specially treated rim-brake sidewalls and hydraulic rim-brake calipers, but for the most part, it’s really not the same thing.

What is the difference between a Center Lock and six-bolt disc rotor?

Six-bolt on the left, Center Lock on the right.

These are the two common ways to mount rotors to hubs. Center Lock uses a splined interface to hold the rotor, and a lockring (which typically uses a cassette lockring tool, but sometimes an external bottom bracket tool) secures it in place. It’s an elegant system introduced by Shimano and now offered by the likes of SRAM and Campagnolo, too.

Typically found on cheaper bikes, six-bolt rotors are simpler and see the rotors attach to the hub with six bolts. A Torx T25 is the common tool for these bolts.

You can identify either rotor type by simply looking at either the hub or rotor. A splined interface is Center Lock, and six-bolt is, well, six-bolt.

A Center Lock adaptor allows a six-bolt rotor to fit on to a splined hub.

It’s worth mentioning that six-bolt rotors can be installed on to splined hubs with the proper adapter, but the reverse isn’t possible.

What is Ice Tech?

Ice Tech is the heat management technology built into specific models of Shimano brake pads and rotors.

In the rotors, Ice Tech refers to a three-layer rotor construction, with an inner aluminium layer sandwiched between stainless steel braking surfaces. Since aluminium is a better heat conductor than steel, the claim is that this design dissipates braking heat better than an all-steel rotor. On higher-end models, such as the RT-99, this is combined with Freeza technology, where the aluminium core is also formed into a finned heat sink. Shimano claims them to be approximately 50% more efficient at cooling than rotors with just Ice Tech.

In the brake pads, Ice Tech refers to backing plates with built-in heat sinks. Like with the rotors, these help pull heat away from the brake pad and dissipate into the surrounding air. The disadvantage of the finned brake pads is marginally increased weight and cost.

While it may not be fitted on the bike you’re buying, most of Shimano’s road-specific brakes are Ice Tech-compatible. Sometimes an upgrade in brake pads is all that’s required.

What is the difference between flat-mount and post-mount calipers? Are they compatible?

An example of a post-mount brake.

Post-mount calipers were adopted from mountain bikes in the early days of road disc brakes. Here, the brake caliper mount onto threaded posts on the frame, with the bolts running through the caliper. The system allowed for easy repositioning and adjustment of the caliper, as well as shared caliper bodies in the early days of road disc brakes.

By contrast, the road-specific flat-mount standard is smaller and requires less frame space.

Flat-mount is a newer road-specific disc brake mount, and is more compact and lighter than post-mount. With flat-mount, the rear caliper affixed with two bolts running through a flattened frame surface and then threading directly into the caliper (or adapter affixed to the caliper). At the front, the caliper is first bolted to an adapter, which is then bolted to two threaded inserts on the fork.

Post-mount calipers can be installed for use on some flat-mount frames; however, adapters for going the other way aren’t generally available.

What is the standard rotor size?

This one is still up to debate, and varies based on which manufacturer you ask. A larger-diameter rotor provide more leverage, and therefore increased braking power, than a smaller one. Additionally, a larger surface area means better heat management. On the flipside, smaller rotors are lighter, less likely to get damaged in a wreck, offer a more gentle braking action, and are more aerodynamic.

Most companies, including SRAM and Campagnolo, suggest 160mm-diameter front rotors on the road, as a conservatively safe option for managing heat on extended downhills. However, Shimano says that most riders will be fine on a 140mm-diameter front rotor thanks to the temperature-reducing Ice Tech technology.

There is a trend, borrowed from mountain bikes and other disc-equipped vehicles, to mismatch rotor sizes on a bike, since as much as 70% of your braking power comes from the front wheel. An example of this is with the new Specialized Tarmac Sl6 Disc, where a larger 160mm rotor is featured up front for increased brake power and heat control, with a lighter 140mm rotor at the back.

Regardless of the argument, frames are typically optimised for a particular size. A bike like the Giant Propel Disc uses 140mm rotors, while others provide adaptors to size up.

What are two-piece rotors?

Let’s first cover one-piece rotors. Most of these are stamped from a single piece of steel. Many cheaper six-bolt rotors are one-piece.

Two-piece rotors see the braking surface attached to a separate carrier or spider. This is often done to allow for a splined Center Lock attachment, but on higher-end models, it can also reduce weight, increase rotor stiffness, and help with heat management, helping draw the heat away from the braking surface.

What’s the difference between metallic and organic pads?

Most brake manufacturers offer a choice of pad material. These are commonly resin (left) and metallic (right).

Both materials offer different characteristics, and your choice should depend on your riding style, discipline, location, and propensity for riding in foul weather.

Resin, otherwise known as organic, disc pads generally offer improved modulation and quieter braking. Some brands, such as SRAM and Campagnolo, also claim they dissipate heat better than metallic pads.

By contrast, metallic, also known as sintered, pads are made of harder materials and have a higher metal content than organic pads. As a result, metallic pads offer greater raw stopping power and last longer than organic pads, albeit at the expense of noisier running and faster rotor wear.

Mountain bikers have long had this choice, and the improved durability means they often use sintered metallic pads. With less grit, less need for raw stopping power, and a demand for silent braking, the majority of disc users on the road prefer resin pads.

Note: Some cheaper Shimano-equipped bikes come with “Resin only” disc rotors, which are made of less-durable steel alloys. You’ll need better rotors if you decide to use metallic pads.

I see premium pads offered with aluminium or titanium; what’s the story?

This is all about weight savings. Disc-brake pad materials are usually bonded to steel backing plates, but ones made of aluminium or titanium will obviously save a few grams. Generally speaking, high-end resin pads will often use aluminium backing plates, while the metallic versions will use titanium backing plate. Between the two, the aluminium ones are lighter.

This is not to be confused with Ice Tech finned pads, which are detailed above.

My bike looks like a bird’s nest. Can I trim the hydraulic brake hoses?

Brake hoses use metal barbs and olives that get compressed to make for an air-tight fit. You’ll need to install new ones each time the hose is shortened.

Yep! Being able to trim the brake hoses is a feature of all systems on the market. However, it can be a more involved job.

At a minimum, you’ll need a way to trim the reinforced hose cleanly, and replacement barbs and olives to push into the fresh end of the hose. This is what creates the airtight seal for wherever the hose is attached. While it is possible to cut most hoses without having to bleed the system, it’s more likely a bleed will be needed.

Can I mix and match components between brands?

Similar to mixing and matching drivetrains, disc brake systems officially have very limited cross-compatibility, but there are some exceptions.

Cross-compatibility is one of the key benefits of mechanical disc-brake systems, and mixing and matching different levers and calipers isn’t just possible, it’s often baked into the design of the caliper. However, be aware that not all brake levers pull the same amount of cable for a given amount of lever movement, and certain combinations will work better than others. Shimano levers will generally produce a firmer lever feel with more pad clearance, but less power, while SRAM and Campagnolo levers will typically yield excellent power, but less pad clearance and a softer lever feel.

Hydraulic systems are far more restrictive. Fluid capacity, brake fluid types, piston diameters, and hose fittings are enough reason to match the caliper manufacturer with the lever. There are some cases where you’re able to mix and match between different generations from within the same brand, but again, the manufacturers rarely suggest doing so.

Brake rotors are a different story, and while you’ll likely get the best performance by matching the rotor to the brake system (especially with higher-end Shimano models), mixing brands rarely results in any major issues.

Road Disc Maintenance

How long do brake pads last for?

It depends. We’ve seen disc-brake pads disappear within a single wet gritty ride, and then other pads last two full seasons.

Generally speaking, if ridden in conditions where grit isn’t an issue, disc-brake pads will go further than rim-brake ones, especially if you use metallic pads (see the section about brake pad types above). However, any amount of wet grit will see the pads abrade away decently quick.

How do I check for brake pad wear?

The brake pad consists of the braking material and the backing plate. You can see how much pad material is left by peering through the caliper. However, it may be necessary to take the wheel out for a closer visual inspection.

With Shimano pads, it’s suggested that you replace your pads when there is less than 0.9mm of braking material left. For SRAM, the minimum measurement is 2.5mm including the backing pads. Campagnolo makes it easier with a wear groove through the center of its pads; replacement is required as soon as the groove is no longer visible.

In addition, look for uneven wear on the pad surface or rotor, as this is typically a sign of a poorly adjusted brake.

Which brake pads do I need for my brakes?

Even within the same brand, different pad shapes for different models are common. Pictured are two brake pads, each for Ultegra-level brakes but one generation apart.

Disc-brake pads vary greatly based on the brand and model of brake. It’s extremely important to match the pad with the brake caliper model.

Once you’ve done this, you’ll find a number of third-party brands offering aftermarket pads. Some do it to be a cheaper alternative than original manufacturer pads. Others do it claiming superior performance, longevity, and noise reduction (such as SwissStop and KoolStop).

If you want to play it safe, it’s generally recommended to stick with the authentic brand of disc pads (rim brakes are a different story) to match your caliper. It’s what your brakes were engineered to use, and frankly, I’ve had too many mixed experiences to suggest otherwise.

Is it really that important to keep oils away from my disc-brake pads?

Yep. Disc brakes are hypersensitive to any form of contamination. Even the oil on your fingertips can be enough to upset the braking performance. Car brakes are arguably no different, but they offer far more surface area, and a far higher heat that burns away such issues.

Take care when degreasing your drivetrain. It’s best to remove the wheel and cover the brake caliper if you’re going to be spraying degreaser.

Keeping your disc perfectly clear of any form of oil contamination is the key to happiness. This means not using spray lubes on your chain, and also being careful when washing your bike in terms of the methods and detergents used. If you insist on spraying degreaser everywhere, don’t put it on the discs, and better yet, use a clean freezer bag (held with an elastic band) to cover the brake caliper.

How do I clean my disc brakes?

You shouldn’t need to, although maybe the occasional wiping away of brake dust with a clean and lint-free rag will be needed. A trickle of water can be good, too.

Isopropyl (or rubbing) alcohol is the commonly recommended cleaner for disc brakes.

If you do need to clean them, use isopropyl alcohol, and preferably the 100% variety, not the slightly diluted stuff you usually find in pharmacies. Yep, it’s not that cheap, nor easy to find, but it’s guaranteed to clean the braking surfaces without leaving any oily residue or causing seal damage.

Automotive disc brake cleaners can often be problematic. Some leave an oily residue, while others strip life out of rubber seals. And just about all degreasers will cause more harm than good.

Bicycle-specific disc-brake cleaners are more likely to be fine to use, but unfortunately, it’s not always the case. Some are just rebadged automotive cleaners, while others are just isopropyl alcohol at a higher price. They’re probably fine, but then again, isopropanol is still the recommended cleaner by all major disc brake manufacturers.

What is brake bed-in and why is it needed?

Brake bed-in, or burn-in, is the process of transferring pad material to the brake surface for proper function. It’s a crucial step any time new brake pads or brake rotors are involved. Read our brake bed-in article for more on this topic.

How do I know when my brakes need to be bled?

Spongy-feeling levers or inconsistent brake feel are both sure-tell signs your brakes could use a bleed. Both of these symptoms are the result of air in the system, which can sometimes happen if you let your brake pads wear too far.

One easy way to check for this is to tip the bike upside down while repeatedly squeezing the brake lever. Does it change the feel? Did the lever just pull to the bar? If so, you’ve got air in the system and need a bleed. If it feels exactly the same, you’re fine.

Another reason for re-bleeding is degradation of the fluid, often caused by excessive heat. Downhill mountain bikers know this too well, with brakes changing feel after extended downhills where rotors become red hot (where’d you be risking blowing a tyre with rim brakes). Another reason is that DOT fluid, such as that used in SRAM systems, absorbs water over time, which eventually lowers the boiling point of the fluid.

Whatever the reason, a system bleed will flush out the old fluid and purge air from the caliper, hose, and lever. Most brake manufacturers recommend this to be done annually, but we know plenty of people who ignore this without issue.

What fluid can I use?

Only use the fluid that your specific brake recommends. Shimano, Campagnolo, Magura, and a few others use specific types of mineral oil. SRAM brakes use automotive DOT 5.1 fluid.

Mineral oil and DOT fluid are not cross-compatible, and using the wrong fluid will cause seals to swell and the brakes to fail. This is certainly something to be very careful with, and be sure to not cross-contaminate systems by sharing bleed kits.

How do I bleed my brakes?

The process will vary depending on the brake model. The following links should help. Generally speaking, bleeding brakes involves a few brand-specific attachments, some basic tools, the right fluid, and a few syringes. Bleed kits are available from each brand as well as aftermarket suppliers, which offer a one-stop-shop option.

• Bleed process for Shimano road disc brakes
• Bleed process for SRAM road disc brakes
• Bleed process for Campagnolo road disc brakes

Why are my rotors a weird colour?

Assuming they’re not just dirty, a change of colour is a sign of heat damage. Heat-damaged rotors will range in colour from a pale yellow, darker yellow, to a progressively darker colour based on the damage, moving into brown, purple, or even blue if truly roasted. If your rotors progress past yellow, you should look at ways to better manage the heat (such as using IceTech pads for Shimano systems and/or running larger rotors).

Do brake rotors wear out?

Yep. Look closely at a Shimano rotor and you’ll see “1.5mm” stamped on it. This is the minimum recommended thickness prior to replacement. Most brands hover around this mark. For example, SRAM suggests 1.55mm minimum thickness for its rotors.

The good news is that the stainless steel braking surface of disc rotors is inherently durable, and you’ll likely go through many sets of disc pads prior to needing new rotors. And when you do, just be happy it’s not your rims that are needing replacement.

Traveling with disc brakes

I heard I need to be careful when removing a disc-brake wheel; why?

This only applies to hydraulic systems. It’s due to the self-adjusting nature of the hydraulic systems, where the pistons are designed to push out until they contact an immovable object (the disc rotor) and then retract a certain amount.

If you squeeze the brake lever without a rotor in place, the pistons will be pushed out until the two pads contact each other. It’s not the end of the world if that happens, though; in most cases, you’ll just need to reset the pads by pushing them back into the caliper body with a brake pad wedge (or a clean flat blade screwdriver and a lot of care).

However, if your pads are severely worn, it’s possible that you could push the pistons out back the seals, in which case you’ll spew fluid everywhere and unseat the pistons. Seriously, this is bad news.

If you do need to take a wheel out for travel, either be careful to not touch the lever, or use a pad spacer/travel wedge. These are plastic wedges supplied with every bike and brakeset (your shop should have some spare, if they didn’t give you some already). They simply clip into the brake caliper for travel and prevent the pads from being pushed together. Always ensure they’re sure they’re clean prior to using them.

Is the brake fluid an issue when traveling?

Nope. It’s a non-pressurized sealed system, and the relatively minor changes in atmospheric pressure associated with air travel are no big deal.

I was told not to turn a disc brake bike upside down? Is it true?

It’s mostly a myth, but with reason.

The earliest disc-brake systems on mountain bikes could suck air into the hoses if the bike was turned upside down. However, none of the newer brake systems on the market use this design, and in theory, there’s no air that can migrate into the lines.

However, modern brakes that are improperly bled can leave air trapped in the fluid reservoir at the lever, which will only present itself when the bike is inverted. If you have a bike with modern disc brakes and the levers go soft when the bike is flipped upside down, that’s a good sign you’re due for a bleed.

What can I use to protect the disc rotors in a travel case?

Lightweight cassette tools exist, meaning easy rotor removal and little weight gain to your luggage. Pictured are tools from Abbey Bike Tools (left) and Wolf Tooth (right)

Disc rotor protectors do exist, and many disc-equipped bikes are shipped with such things. Ask your local shop for some, assuming they’ve haven’t made it to the bin yet. However, these will only do so much, and so my advice is to remove your rotors for travel.

Removing your brake rotors is easy with Center Lock rotors, and there are even lightweight tools designed specifically for this, such as the Wolf Tooth Components Pack Tool range. Six-bolt rotors are still easy enough to work with, but far slower and fiddly.

Once removed, store the rotors in clean resealable plastic bags. This will ensure the rotors don’t get contaminated by touching anything else in your case.

Troubleshooting

Why do my brakes squeal?

More often than not, this is due to contamination. Sometimes it’s poor setup, sometimes it’s a warning of needing new pads, sometimes it’s because your pads are glazed or of the wrong material, but nearly always, it’s contamination.

Keeping any form of oil, degreasers, and bike cleaners away from your disc brake pads and rotors is a sure way to keep them squeak-free. And of course, a proper bed-in process is a must, too.

Why do I occasionally hear brake rub at random times?

Discs brakes run on very tight tolerances, with typically only a millimeter or less of space between the rotor and the pads. This doesn’t leave much room for error. If your brakes make rubbing noises at random times, it’s either a sign of flex, a brake needing servicing, or outside elements.

Hub and frame/fork/axle flex can be the cause of the rubbing. Do you only ever hear it when leaning the bike over in a specific direction or in a sprint? If so, it’s flex. Checking that your axles are done up tight is the first step. Also check that there’s no play in your hubs while you’re at it. If that doesn’t take care of the issue, check that the caliper is properly positioned with an even gap to the pads on both sides of the rotor. If that doesn’t fix it, it may be just be a flexy axle or dropout setup.

Sometimes pads rub because the pistons behind them are getting sticky. This can be due to a build-up of debris, or sometimes just with long-term use. But a brake service (where the pistons are reset and cleaned) and the brake blded will usually solve the problem.

Lastly, mud, grit, or just plain water can be enough to make sounds on your discs. If you just rode through a puddle and now they’re rubbing, don’t stress about it. Applying your brakes will probably clear the muck and bring back the silence.

My brakes rub, but only at one point of the wheel. What do I do?

A warped brake rotor is the cause of a brake rubbing every revolution of the wheel.

Sounds like you’ve got a warped disc rotor. They’re only about two millimeters thick, so it’s expected that they can bend. Because of this, it does pay to be careful: don’t lean the bike up against the rotor, and take extra care when transporting the bike in a vehicle or case to keep the rotors from being damaged.

If this has happened directly following a long descent, it may be heat related. Give the rotor time to cool, and if still warped, continue with the advice below.

If the rotors are not terribly bent, they can be pulled or pushed back into shape. This is typically done with the wheel in the bike, using the brake pads as a gauge. Use a piece of clean paper towel to touch the disc surface with, and gently use your thumb at the point of rubbing to push the rotor in the opposite direction. Go easy; it doesn’t take much force to bend the rotor back.

For a little more precision, just about every tool brand offers a specific tool for this job. Alternatively, you can use an adjustable spanner, but just make sure it’s super clean before you do.

My hydraulic brakes constantly rub; what can I do?

Did you just have the wheel out and now they’re rubbing like crazy? If so, refer to our section above about traveling with discs. The answer here is to push the brake pads (and pistons) back into the caliper to reset the system.

If this wasn’t the case, you’ve likely got a brake caliper that needs aligning. Peer through the caliper and see whether the rotor is rubbing on one specific side. Yes? Ok, it’s time to slightly loosen the two bolts holding the caliper in place. Once loose, many calipers will automatically centre by pulling the brake lever and then tightening the two bolts while holding the lever. Sometimes this doesn’t work, but there are plenty of other tricks to overcome this. Sighting through the caliper and carefully tightening the caliper may work (with a white piece of paper on the ground, to making visibility easier).

Another option is to use a business card between the rotor and pad that is rubbing. With the business card in place, repeat the process above. Loosen the caliper bolts, squeeze the lever, and tighten the bolts while holding the lever. This may take some trial and error, but it’ll typically fix the issue when the brakes are not automatically positioning themselves correctly.

If you’ve just installed new pads, and now the gap is minimal, try pushing the pistons back into the bores of the caliper (use a plastic tyre lever, or a the ring-end of a small spanner). Sometimes your brake system will have too much fluid in it, which can occur if your brakes were given a quick bleed or top-up with worn pads in place. A fresh bleed, or carefully opening the system to release fluid (without letting air in!) will be required.

I’ve had a few people attempt to adjust my brakes, but no matter what, the pads are not contacting the rotor square. What now?

Assuming the caliper adjustment is right, and your rotor is straight, then it sounds like your frame/fork mount is to blame. Speak to your frame manufacturer about a solution, but most likely they’ll suggest getting the frame surfaces faced (and hopefully, they’ll foot the bill).

The Park Tool Disc Tab Facing Tool (DT-5.2) is designed to face all common disc mount standards. This is very much a shop tool.

Park Tool makes a tool called the DT-5.2 Disc Tab Facing Tool for this very issue. Sometimes paint, or just crummy manufacturing tolerances, can cause alignment issues. The disc tab facing tool will remove material until the brake caliper mounting surface is parallel to the axle. It’s an extremely expensive tool, so look for a workshop that has one (and unfortunately, few of them do).

My spinning disc brake cut off my left leg. What do I do?

Bugger. Are you sure it wasn’t the race fencing? Actually, it was probably the chain ring. Either way, you should probably seek medical attention.

My disc brakes lack power. What can I do?

A few things could be causing this, but most likely, it’s one of the following issues.

Firstly, it’s most likely your braking surface is contaminated. Any amount of oil, even that of your body oil from your fingertips, can upset the performance of disc brakes. Cleaning the system may help, but if it’s badly contaminated, new pads and a thoroughly cleaned rotor are likely the best answer.

Another cause can be from an incorrect bed-in process, causing glazing or similar on the pads and rotors. See our article about brake bed-in to learn more.

Speaking of glazing, it’s possible for this to happen if the brakes are dragged on an extremely long descent. This can be identified with a glass-like finish to your brake pad surfaces. Remove the pads and rub them along some clean sandpaper; that should do it.

It may also be air in your system that’s preventing power from being transferred efficiently fro the lever to the caliper. A brake bleed will solve this; see our section about brake bleeding above.

Lastly, it may be that your brake rotors aren’t big enough for your riding style or body weight, especially if your bike is currently equipped with 140mm-diameter rotors. Speak to your shop about whether your bike can support moving to a larger rotor that will offer greater leverage.

What can I do if my hydraulic brake lever pulls very close to the bar?

Sounds like there’s not enough fluid in the system. Check whether a bleed is needed by following the recommendation in the “How do I know when my brakes need bleeding?” section above.

If that’s not the cause, then this is known as lever stroke. You have a few other options.

Pumping the brake pads to run closer to the rotor will provide less lever travel. To do this, remove the wheel (and rotor) and carefully pull brake until you see the pads move. Re-install the wheel and check lever feel. Repeat this process until the lever is as desired. Do be warned that doing this will make it harder to get a rub-free setup, and it’ll only last until the pads wear.

Some brakes also offer lever stroke adjustment. If this is an available option, there’s likely a adjustment screw that can be used to reduce the lever stroke.

Why do my brakes lose power when braking for long periods?

This is known as brake fade. It’s sometimes a sign that the brake fluid is getting too hot, and is starting to boil. When that happens, the once-incompressible fluid becomes a compressible gas, and you’ll quickly lose power. If this occurs, it’s strongly recommended that you move to a larger rotor size, or if available, heat-dissipating brake pads and rotors, such as Shimano’s Ice Tech range.

Alternatively, it may be a sign that you have air in your system. See the section above on bleeding brakes.

What do I do if my brakes suddenly lose power?

Well that’s not good!

The first thing to do is to try and pump the brake. This is simply a matter of squeezing the lever quickly on and off. If it’s air causing your sudden brake woes, then pumping the lever will hopefully move the bubble out of the hose and up into the reservoir.

If that doesn’t work, then most likely you’ll be left with one good brake. Use it carefully to come to a stop and then proceed with absolute caution. Speak to your local shop about the issue and have them check the system. Although extremely rare, a faulty component is a likely culprit of a full failure.

What did we miss? What are your top tips when it comes to disc brakes?

The post An endless FAQ to road disc brakes appeared first on CyclingTips.

When it comes to riding gravel, shoe and pedal choice is wide open (much like the places to ride). Road pedals and shoes remain for those who ride on smoother and better-kept gravel roads, ideally where putting a foot down isn’t likely. While cross-country mountain bike shoes and pedals (SPD style) are commonly the pick for unknown adventures. The smaller pedals offer a smaller cleat, and space for a surrounding tread on the shoe, meaning walking across rocks or over sketchy river crossings isn’t nearly as bad as if you were in road clogs.

Mountain bike shoes do the job, but you can be sure a cycling discipline has reached mass appeal when big brands, such as Shimano, start offering product specific to the space. Joining the likes of Giro and Specialized, Shimano’s relatively new XC5 laced SPD shoe is just this, a mid-range shoe tailored to the gravel crowd, but one that can comfortably handle duty in touring, commuting, cyclocross and even mountain biking, too.

Tech writer Dave Rome has been spinning circles with a pair since September last year, using them for everything from bunch rides to commuting to gravel rides and trail riding.

High-value details

Priced at US$150 / AU$199, the XC5 is not the typical performance shoe you commonly see reviewed on CyclingTips. Instead, they represent a mid-level option for those that just ride rather than racing. So, you know, the majority of us.

Without question, the laces are the defining feature and are a contrast from what’s expected of the Japanese manufacturer. These laces flow in a traditional orientation from the knuckle of your toes through to the top of the shoe’s tongue. At the forefoot, the laces deviate through short loops connected directly to the shoe’s upper, the goal being to help tension and wrap the upper more snugly around the curviest part of your foot.

The upper is made up of a few panels, with the closed-off toe splitting the two perforated pieces of synthetic leather. A large reflective panel sits at the rear, with a padded interior designed to cuddle your heel. Unlike Shimano’s performance shoes, the XC5 doesn’t attempt to lock the heel in with any special one-way fabric or aggressive shaping.

The sole reveals a similarly relaxed design, with a carbon fiber-reinforced nylon construction that rates a 7/12 on Shimano’s stiffness scale. Keeping the sole covered is a tread from Michelin, a company that knows a thing or two about rubber tread and off-road traction. Provisions for toe spikes are provided, but the optional 18mm toe spikes themselves are not.

Two lace colour options are provided.

The XC5s are available in either black (as tested) or a lighter grey/orange option. Additional laces are provided, with our black sample supplied with both orange and grey laces. The shoes span a size range of EU38-50, all in a single width option. A women’s-specific version is available too, spanning sizes EU36-44 and in a black/magenta colourway.

I weighed my EU43 sample at 615g for the pair, lighter than expected given the rubber tread.

Comfort over speed

It’s not often I get a product that’s so laissez-faire in its ways that I struggle to find a specific purpose for it. And this isn’t a bad thing — the XC5 proved to be a reliable (and comfortable) choice for just about any bike-related adventure.

Shimano classifies the XC5 as a mixed-terrain shoe, pointing toward gravel, cyclocross, cross country mountain biking and commuting. And while I agree with much of that, I’d add in touring (aka bikepacking, for the new-age crowd) to the mix, too.

No doubt, these are more like a cross-country mountain bike shoe than a road shoe. The 2-bolt SPD compatibility and generous Michelin tread is all the evidence you need there. However, the laced retention, synthetic upper and reflective details are not features you’d typically seek (or find) in a mountain bike shoe.

In how they feel, I’d liken the XC5s to Shimano’s endurance-focused RP road shoes, where the technology and style of a performance shoe is there, but with a relaxed fit designed for all-day comfort.

Shimano shoes are generally quite generous with who they fit, and the XC5’s relaxed nature only adds to this reputation. With a more open heel design, a forgiving upper and a pliable sole, there’s certainly more leeway here than with a race shoe. However, a lack of width choices is perhaps as much a sign of the price as it is of demand. If your foot shape is at one extreme of the bell-curve, you’ll likely want to pursue something with additional width options.

With a relaxed heel hold, these feel more like a cross-trainer sneaker, albeit with a stiffer sole. The sole offers a carbon plate that starts at the toes and ends just before the heel, enough to offer suitable stiffness at pedal contact. Walking reveals enough flex in the right places to nearly get around like a normal person, especially with the pliable rubber tread.

The shoes feel plenty efficient, and only minimal heel slip is felt when making a specific effort to seek it. Where a race shoe’s complete stiffness means your foot naturally wants to pull away from the board-like sole, the XC5’s sole allows some flex to retain the foot.

The interior side of the nylon sole is moulded in a gridded pattern, something that attempts to optimise stiffness while reducing weight. While I can’t say I actually noticed it, this type of design does increase the stack height.

Take a look inside and you’ll find a basic foam innersole with an average amount of instep support. Unlike the innersoles provided in Shimano’s more expensive shoes, these innersoles don’t offer adjustable arch support, but nonetheless, I found them comfortable.

The Michelin tread does an impressive job at providing traction from clean tile floors to wet roots. The mid-foot of the sole is covered in rubber, with four lugs protruding from the heel to give a stable stance. Traction at the toes is a little limited in stock form, and you’ll want to buy some toe spikes if you’re planning on running anywhere. Like most mountain bike shoes, none of the lugs are replaceable and to date, durability hasn’t been an issue.

With basic setup markings, the cleat attaches with Shimano’s typical four-hole cleat plate, allowing plenty of fore-aft adjustment. The cleat is protected with a two-compound rubber tread, with a more durable material used at the pedals’ contact point. Just past this, the tread is separated, allowing a more natural step instead of the usual flat-foot stomp of performance shoes. The tread height is generous enough to allow near-silent walking on a hard surface, whereas racier shoes often leave the cleat slightly exposed.

The laces are effective at providing a generous range of tension across the foot, however, the mid-foot loops stubbornly hold the laces in position. To some, this may be a positive as the shoe will keep its adjustment between wears, but for me, I just found it slowed the process. Either way, they serve a functional purpose, and certainly the upper would squirm if it weren’t for them.

They’re. Just. So. Damn. Long.

Flat in shape, the laces offer a little stretch, enough to help lock them in place. Annoyingly, the laces themselves are obscenely long which, I suspect, is due to Shimano using the same length lace across its full size range. Laced up and tucked through the elastic lace holder, the loops would sit over my toes and flap in the wind. Make smaller loops and the plastic crimped ends would tap against the crank arms. At least with my EU43 samples, the laces are simply too long.

With a closed toe, the perforated synthetic leather upper is breathable, but not at all breezy. Arguably this is nice to keep your toes dry through stream crossings and puddles, but you’ll quickly get clammy socks on a hot summer’s day.

The toe area is lightly reinforced, with some protection given to the big toes. I managed to test this out on both gravel and mountain bike rides, where rocks flipped up were deflected away without a stubbed toe.

To tie it up

I still believe that laces aren’t the best pick for trail riding, or cross country and cyclocross racing. They hold dirt, get caught on things and are finicky to get off when you see a leech enter your shoe (perhaps too specific of an example, but the event is still fresh).

Likewise, the gentle heel hold and softer sole of the XC5 isn’t going to replace a performance shoe when Strava trophies are on the line.

But I admit to liking the casual style and all-day comfort they offer, and they’re nice for sightseeing, gravel riding, commuting and the occasional play on the mountain bike, too. The XC5’s long laces (on the smaller sizes) are my biggest complaint of these shoes and, frankly, a simple oversight on Shimano’s part. Assuming the XC5s tick the boxes of what you’re after, they’re cheap enough to allow room in the budget for new laces.

An elastic lace keeper is provided. It’s easy to use and effective at holding the (long) laces.

The innersoles may be basic, but they’re comfortable.

The post Shimano XC5 multi-surface SPD shoe review appeared first on CyclingTips.

Endurance road bikes have traditionally paired their softer ride qualities, slightly fatter tires, and mellower handling with more upright positioning, presumably to better suit the less-sporting aspirations of the people expected to buy them. However, what if you want all of those former performance qualities, but still want the bike to fit like a race bike? Is there anything wrong with wanting a smooth ride on rough pavement along with an aggressive position?

BMC’s Roadmachine ventures into somewhat strange territory by filling that niche. It’s stable and composed like a good endurance machine, but positions its rider as if they’re about to line up for Paris-Roubaix. It’s a bold decision that may prove a tough sell in the general marketplace, but it’s an enticing option for progressive roadies that want to go fast on more than just glass-smooth tarmac.

Three years ago, I attended a unique event called the Baller’s Ride, a private gathering of custom builders and key retail partners set near the picturesque Blue Ridge Mountains in Nellysford, Virginia. On tap was 200km with 4,300m of climbing for the weekend, with a course that comprised a mix of paved, dirt, and crushed gravel roads. You were allowed to bring any bike you wished, but you could only bring one, and attendees were strongly advised to choose carefully as much of the route was sparsely populated with no phone service.

If there is one model in the BMC lineup that constitutes an all-purpose performance road bike, the RoadMachine is it.

The landscape in mass-produced road bikes then was a little different than it is now. There were road racers, endurance road bikes, and a slow-but-growing smattering of gravel machines, but what I was after was more along the lines of what a pro might use at a cobbled classic: only slightly tempered handling relative to a full-blown road racer, clearance for 30mm-wide tires, and an aggressive fit. I also wanted disc brakes and wide-range gearing to better handle the varied terrain and uncertain weather.

I couldn’t find what I wanted from any major brand at the time, so I ended up having to go with a custom build, but the rapidly changing road market now offers up a wealth of options.

“The one-bike collection”

Introduced less than a year after I came back from the Baller’s Ride, the Roadmachine was billed by BMC as what its own employees would buy if they could only have one road bike, and at least on paper, it’s difficult to argue with that claim.

The RoadMachine’s sleek profile wouldn’t look out of place at a top-tier road race. The head tube is short, the rear end appears impressively compact, and the hidden routing leaves just the slightest bits of cabling exposed to the wind. The top tube slopes only moderately, the main tubes and asymmetrical chainstays convey a sense of efficiency with their highly oversized cross-sections, and the top-end RoadMachine 01 version’s carbon fiber frame boasts a claimed weight of just 920g in a 54cm size — not bad at all.

“RoadMachine” is a fittingly ambiguous name for BMC’s latest creation, as it’s very adept at a wide range of reasonably surfaced roads. A gravel bike it is not, but then again, that’s not what BMC is after here.

It’s only once you dig into the details that the RoadMachine’s differences are fully revealed. It may look like it came out of the WorldTour, but in reality, it’s somewhat of a hybrid between BMC’s Teammachine SLR racer and Granfondo GF endurance-bike families.

The most significant changes are buried within the frame geometry, which incorporate many of the tricks manufacturers have used at Paris-Roubaix for ages.

The Roadmachine’s 410mm chainstays are slightly longer than what’s normally found on a full-blown racer (although the latest Teammachine’s stays are now the same length), and the front axle is about 10mm further in front of the rider than usual thanks to 0.5°-slacker head tube angles and increased fork rakes. Combined with the 2mm of additional bottom bracket drop (71mm vs. 69mm), the Roadmachine is meant to provide slightly more stable high-speed manners than the SLR, but with similar low-speed agility thanks to the shared trail dimensions.

The additional length at either end also provides more tire clearance, and with the Roadmachine’s disc-only format, BMC officially claims tires up to 30mm-wide will easily clear the fork crown and rear stays — not enough for proper gravel duty, of course, but more than sufficient for tackling questionably paved roads and smoother unpaved ones.

The Roadmachine gets even more intriguing in terms of fit.

Unlike nearly every other endurance road bike out there, the Roadmachine isn’t hampered by an overly cramped and upright cockpit that limits its appeal to enthusiasts. In fact, the reach is virtually identical to the SLR across the size range, and the stack is only about 10mm taller when the bike is equipped with the optional low headset cover. Stock bikes are fitted with the 16mm-taller cone, however, but even then, there’s plenty of room to stretch out, even if the bars are a bit higher than some fitter riders might initially prefer.

BMC offers both tall and short headset cones for the RoadMachine 01 frame, depending on the desired fit. The tall option (pictured here) makes for a solid all-around position, while the short one allows for nearly as much drop as the more racing-oriented SLR family. Either way, the blended shape looks slick.

Those numbers are more drastic when comparing to other brands. For the 56cm size, a Trek Domane SLR 9 Disc has a 377mm reach and 591mm stack, while the Specialized Roubaix posts figures of 381mm and 611mm. In stark contrast, the Roadmachine can go as low as 574mm for the stack (or 590mm with the stock cone), and lets riders stretch out their backs with reach dimensions between 388mm and 393mm.

Visually, the Roadmachine is about as clean as can be, with BMC upping the ante on internal cable routing for the category. A proprietary stem feeds the hydraulic brake lines down the flattened sides of the 1 1/8-to-1 1/2″ tapered steerer tube, and from there, they’re routed either through the frame or down into the non-driveside fork blade before popping out right at the caliper bodies. Wiring for Shimano or Campagnolo electronic drivetrains follows a similarly circuitous path, but mechanical derailleur housings are fed into the top of the down tube in a more conventional fashion.

To tidy things up even further, the carbon fiber headset cover and custom headset spacers are profiled to match the design of the frame, and the custom stem faceplate can sandwich integrated mounts for Garmin computers and GoPro-compatible accessories behind it.

The faceplate features integrated computer and accessory mounts. I’ve paired the lower fitting with a Bontrager Blendr light mount for daytime visibility here, but any GoPro-compatible bits will work.

Despite all the integration, BMC has thankfully still made some efforts to make the Roadmachine more livable. The stem may be proprietary, but the handlebar is as normal as could be, meaning users can swap to a different size or shape as desired. Likewise, the headset spacers are split, so most bar height adjustments can be performed without serious surgery (although changing the headset cover requires removing the brake lines and rebleeding the system).

Up top is a tidy internal wedge-style seatpost binder for the D-shaped carbon fiber seatpost (with a rubber cover to keep water and debris out), and BMC continues the theme with tooled 12mm-diameter DT Swiss thru-axles front and rear. The single included snap-on handle can be easily traded between the front and rear ends, or if you’re careful to carry a multi-tool in your repair kit, it can be left at home entirely.

BMC offers the Roadmachine family in three different versions. The top-end Roadmachine 01 uses the most premium blend of carbon fiber, while the 02 shares identical molds, but more economical fiber blends, for a heftier claimed weight of 1,100g. There’s also the aluminum Roadmachine 03, which tips the scales at a claimed 1,270g.

The frame may sport some aero-looking elements (such as the U-shaped seat tube and seatpost), but in reality, the tube shaping is mostly there for comfort purposes.

Of the three, the Roadmachine 01 is the most performance oriented, and it goes about its business with no fender or rack mounts; sorry, you’re just going to have to get wet if you head out in the rain. The 02 adds hidden fender mounts (and you’ll have to downsize the tires if you decide to run with guards), and the 03 adds a rear rack mount as well for more utility.

BMC sent for review the Roadmachine 01 Two, which uses the top-end frameset paired with SRAM’s Red eTap HRD wireless electronic disc-brake groupset. Rolling stock consists of 47mm-deep DT Swiss ERC 1400 Spline aero carbon clincher wheels wrapped in 28mm-wide Vittoria Corsa tires, and finishing kit is provided by Fizik and 3T. The gearing range is impressively broad, with 50/34T chainrings up front, and a generous 11-32T cassette out back.

Actual weight for a 51cm sample is 7.49kg (16.51lb) without pedals or accessories, and retail price is US$9,500 / AU$11,500 / £7,900 / €9,000.

See more at bmc-switzerland.com

In search of roads less traveled

Three years ago, I was a mixed-surface neophyte, but that weekend in rural Virginia opened my eyes. Today, nearly all of my road rides comprise a blend of paved and unpaved surfaces — and far fewer cars — so I was certainly eager to see how well the Roadmachine 01 Two suited my habits. Suffice to say, had this bike existed when I was figuring out a bike for the Baller’s Ride, it’s very possible I may have just gone with one of these with some 30mm-wide tires in place of the stock 28mm ones.

On good-quality tarmac, the RoadMachine is much like any other high-end disc-equipped road racer: stiff, efficient, and fast. The fat carbon fiber tubes lend a distinctly responsive feel under power whether just cruising along on the flats or stomping the pedals out of the saddle on a steep climb, and the front end is similarly stout, wavering nary a bit when you’re really muscling the bars. That rigidity carries straight through to the back end, too, where there’s minimal tail wagging even in a full-blown sprint.

BMC puts the extra width of the PF86 press-fit bottom bracket shell to good use, matching it to a huge down tube, widely spaced chainstays, and a flared seat tube base. On bikes with mechanical drivetrains, the hatch at the bottom makes it easier to fish cables through the frame.

It’s a similar story in terms of rider position. Despite the stock tall headset cone (the low cone is only included with bare framesets), it was easy to replicate my usual amount of bar drop on the Roadmachine by removing the headset spacers. As a nice bonus, those custom spacers are split so that you don’t need to remove any cabling when adjusting the bar height, and since standard 1 1/8″-diameter headset spacers fit, you aren’t forced into cutting the steerer tube when experimenting with your setup like with some other aero-minded cockpit designs.

The Roadmachine carries speed well, too, thanks in part to its standard aero wheels and the aggressive riding position.

It’s also a gifted climber, as you’d expect with its stout chassis and low weight. Further helping in that department is the extremely wide-range gearing. The bigger ratio gaps perhaps aren’t ideally suited for maintaining a precise cadence while keeping up in a bunch, but given that the Roadmachine isn’t designed for that, it’s an easy thing to forgive, especially as you’re blissfully spinning up a long 15% grade in that glorious 34-32T combination.

The stock 11-32T cassette combines with the compact chainrings for a huge amount of total gearing range.

As should be the case for any endurance road bike, the ride quality of the Roadmachine is better than what you might typically get from a race bike, although the improvement falls primarily on the bigger tires. At 50-55psi (I weigh about 70kg), the bike feels decidedly cushy, albeit at the expense of greater chances of a pinch flat. But running a more typical 75-80psi highlights the fact that the frameset itself rides pretty firmly, and is not at all as pillowy-soft as BMC’s “Tuned Compliance Concept” marketing collateral might have you believe.

Some of this is likely due to the smaller 51cm size I tested for the review (smaller frames generally ride stiffer than bigger ones), but even so, I don’t expect that larger sizes will feel dramatically different. That all said, the Roadmachine is still more accommodating in terms of ride comfort than most race bikes out there.

Handling-wise, the Roadmachine definitely errs on the stable side of the spectrum. The long wheelbase and lower bottom bracket yield confidence-inspiring high-speed manners, and it’s generally calm through dusty unpaved corners. That stability makes the Roadmachine a little less eager to initially turn into corners, but it nevertheless cuts a confident arc provided you’re willing to lean it over harder.

To use an automotive analogy, I equate the Roadmachine to a good GT vs. a dedicated track car. It’s nearly as fast in most situations, but it’s more luxurious in look and feel, more forgiving, and it requires less attention and skill to get the most out of it. Carrying on with the automotive theme, it’s important to note that the Roadmachine is no rally car, though. While it’s wonderfully adept on a wide range of pavement conditions, it’s still at its best on a proper road. Even when taking full advantage of the 30mm maximum tire size, it’s quickly out of its element if you try to tackle rougher unpaved paths. Smoother dirt is generally ok, but gravel is likely out of the question.

The medium cage length of the SRAM Red eTap WiFLi rear derailleur handles sprockets up to 32-teeth.

Spec-wise, the Roadmachine 01 Two is mostly a home run.

The SRAM Red eTap wireless groupset accentuates the clean look of the chassis. Shift performance is consistent and reliable, albeit seemingly a tad slower (and noisier) than Shimano Di2 or Campagnolo EPS. I was a little disappointed that BMC didn’t include the optional Blip remote buttons for shifting from the tops, but in fairness, they’re not horribly expensive and easy to add afterward. The hydraulic disc brakes provided excellent overall power and great control, although I would have preferred a lighter-feeling lever. And say what you will about the aesthetics of the hydraulic levers; my hands only cared about how comfortable they were to hold.

The DT Swiss ERC 1400 Spline 47 carbon wheelset was hard to fault. The 47mm depth is a good compromise of lower weight, aerodynamics, and crosswind stability; the 19mm inner width provides excellent support for the wider tires best suited to the Roadmachine’s capabilities; the 1,538g claimed weight is good for the depth; and the star ratchet rear hub driver offers well-proven durability.

I do question the pairing of wider tires from an aerodynamic perspective, though, given that the external width is a more modest 25mm. DT Swiss plainly states that the shape was optimized for 25mm-wide tires, so there’s likely some “lightbulb effect” in play here with the stock 28mm ones (and more so if you decide to install 30s), although it’s difficult to discern from the saddle. Either way, it’s a minor niggle.

The DT Swiss ERC 1400 Spline carbon clinchers are a great pick for the RoadMachine 01, with a 19mm-wide tire bed that provides excellent support for bigger tires, a slippery 47mm-deep profile, and a low 1,538g claimed weight for the set. They’re tubeless-compatible, too, if you prefer to go that route.

Opinions will invariably be mixed on the 3T Ergonova bar bend and Fizik Aliante saddle, but both of those are obviously matters of personal preference — and again, BMC’s smart design means it’s easy to change the bar for one with a shape you prefer.

Making adjustments to the saddle and bar angle is cause for some headache, though. The rear-facing stem faceplate bolts are difficult to access, and provide very little room for a torque wrench head. Likewise, the forward bolt on the two-bolt seatpost is deeply recessed, and doesn’t play nicely with most portable multi-tools.

Only Garmin users will be able to easily take advantage of the included integrated computer mount, too, as it’s the only format officially supported. BMC has at least based the system on the common GoPro finned interface, however, so if you’re able to find a computer mount based around that, you’ll be in luck.

Lowered seat stays have become increasingly common in recent years, as companies have discovered that they help the seat tube flex under load for better rider comfort than a conventional seat cluster arrangement.

Lastly, it would have been nice if BMC had included the second-tier Roadmachine 02 frameset’s hidden fender mounts on this top-end Roadmachine 01 variant. Clearly there’s room (the bikes use nearly identical molds), but presumably BMC assumes that 01 buyers want a cleaner look and less weight. That may be, but it seems like a silly sacrifice when proper fenders can be so incredibly useful when riding in wet weather.

But in fairness to BMC, the Roadmachine 01 Two does look fantastic. Simply put, it’s one of the best-looking road bikes I’ve ridden in recent memory, right down to the matte finish and muted colors. It’s understated, mature, and grown-up in a way that many high-end road racers are not, and even the branding is fairly subdued. Well done, BMC.

BMC’s RoadMachine 01 Two is as much a study in superb design as it is a fantastic all-road machine.

The cutout in the seat tube suggests an aero bike-like demeanor, but the frame’s proximity to the rear wheel is misleading.

The internal cable routing makes for an especially clean front end.

The chainstays have a prominent transition in shape just behind the bottom bracket shell. BMC claims it provides a dedicated flex point as part of the frame’s “Tuned Compliance Concept,” but that seems hopeful at best.

Look, ma, no cables!

BMC doesn’t bother with a proprietary handlebar or integrated one-piece setup for the RoadMachine. Instead, the front end uses a conventional bar and a special stem that feeds the brake hoses down along the flattened sides of the steerer tube, and then into the frame. It’s easier to live with than many other fully internally routed bikes, but it still requires very careful line lengths.

The resultant bit of exposed cabling might bother some, but it seems like a very reasonable compromise in trade for vastly improved handlebar compatibility.

A dummy hatch is used on bikes with electronic drivetrains, but a set of housing stops would bolt on here for models with mechanical transmissions, which use more conventional routing.

The internal wedge-type seatpost binder holds tight and has run creak-free. A tidy rubber cover helps keep water and debris from entering the frame.

The fork’s kinked shape is similar to the chainstay, with the same Tuned Compliance Concept explanation behind it. Make no mistake, though: seemingly all of the bike’s comfort, at least in the smaller sizes, comes from the 28mm-wide tires.

Disc brakes may make for a more cluttered-looking area around the dropouts, but there’s no denying that they also clean up the area where the rim-brake calipers once resided.

BMC curiously offsets the seat tube rearward, perhaps for some aero benefit in the way it interacts with the rear wheel. However, especially in combination with the setback seatpost, some riders might find themselves a bit challenged in achieving their desired saddle position.

Tire clearance is impressively generous throughout, at least assuming you’re sticking to reasonably surfaced roads.

The stock 28mm-wide Vittoria tires have room to spare.

Things are a bit tighter down by the chainstays, but there’s still nearly 40mm of space.

The asymmetrical chainstays necessarily pinch down a bit on the driveside to provide clearance for the chainrings, but they’re very broad otherwise for excellent stiffness under power.

A handy chain watcher is integrated into the frame. It works quite well, and is easy to adjust, too.

BMC uses its own adapter plate for the flat-mount front disc-brake caliper. Dedicated plates are required for specific rotor sizes (unlike standard flip-flop flat-mount plates), but the profiled shape definitely looks a lot better.

Given how tidy and clean the custom adapter plate looks up front, it’s a bit disappointing that BMC didn’t do the same thing out back. The bolt heads are at least recessed up into the profile of the chainstay, though.

BMC doesn’t leave much room for error in terms of hose lengths with the location of the exit ports.

It’s the same situation up front.

The rear-facing stem faceplate bolts maintain a very clean look, but they’re a pain to access.

SRAM’s wireless Red eTap HRD groupset is a natural pairing for the BMC RoadMachine frameset.

BMC clearly expects RoadMachine riders to do a lot of climbing, given the stock 50/34T compact chainrings.

The 28mm-wide Vittoria Corsa tires ride exceptionally smoothly, grip tenaciously, and have very low rolling resistance.

DT Swiss has optimized the rim shape aerodynamically for 25mm-wide tires, though, and while 28mm-wide ones obviously fit, it’s unclear how much of a negative effect they have on drag.

The rear hub is based on DT Swiss’s proven 240 family, and uses the same bombproof star ratchet driver mechanism.

I’m not a particularly big fan of the bend on the stock 3T Ergonova bar, but thankfully, it’s an easy thing to change.

The slightly flattened tops provide lots of surface area for your palms, and are very comfortable.

BMC equips the RoadMachine 01 Two with a cushy Fizik Aliante saddle.

The handle on the 12mm thru-axle skewers is removable, so just one is needed for both wheels. You can also do without it entirely for a cleaner look, provided you take care to pack a 6mm wrench somewhere in your repair kit.

The post BMC Roadmachine 01 Two review: The endurance bike that thinks it’s a racer appeared first on CyclingTips.

XTR has occupied the top tier in Shimano’s mountain bike range since the first generation decimated the CNC-machined aftermarket world in 1991. Shimano has now announced the new XTR M9100 and M9120 versions, both of which not only incorporate a 12-speed cassette and proprietary freehub standard, but provide some clues on where Shimano will be heading in the years to come.

Many of the new features are virtually guaranteed to eventually make their way to Deore XT downward, and some will likely show up in Shimano’s road range as well. Dura-Ace R9100 still seems so new, for example, but if Shimano maintains its usual release schedule, we’re only twelve months away from seeing the next generation and so this new XTR release is as good as a crystal ball.

As a long-time mountain bike nerd, this article is the result of many annoying questions pointed at Shimano during a two-hour presentation. There are still a few gaps in the information available, but this far-from-succinct article should give you a clear idea of what to expect before the groupsets’ expected September arrival.

Two racing groupsets for cross-country (M9100) and enduro (M9120)

Much like recent generations of XTR and XT, Shimano is launching the new XTR version in two clearly differentiated formats to cover the vastly different needs in competitive mountain biking. However, whereas the two variants were called “Race” and “Trail” before, both XTR versions are now fully aimed at racing, but with one designated for cross-country competition and the other more specifically suited to enduro.

For the cross country racer, there’s the M9100 groupset.

The cross-country groupset (M9100) is all about smooth shifting with more tightly spaced gaps on the cassette, dependable efficiency, and low weight. It’s the groupset you’ll see chosen by endurance racers and anyone else building feathery cross-country and short-travel trail bikes.

Sharing a number of components with the M9100 groupset, enduro and trail riders will be best served with the M9120 groupset.

Meanwhile, XTR M9120 is pitched at the progressive enduro aspect of the sport, where the longer suspension travels and more demanding riding conditions call for increased chain security, more raw braking power, and greater gearing range. Modern enduro racing is nearly as hard on equipment as downhill racing, after all, but participants are also often required to pedal back up to the starting gate, too.

And before we go further, bear in mind that this release of XTR only covers the mechanical version. Yep, that braided steel shift cable is very much still alive. However, I’ll come back to this somewhat surprising news later.

XTR cranked to twelve

SRAM’s single-chainring mountain bike drivetrains are already on their second generation, but Shimano have been stubbornly slow and resistant to change despite flocks of mountain bikers adopting the simplified transmission format en masse. More frame manufacturers are realising the tyre clearance and geometry benefits by specifically designing bikes without front derailleur compatibility, though, and with that, the number of chainrings you have (or don’t) is quickly becoming less of a choice.

The previous XTR generation already included a 1x option, but Shimano was clearly still committed to showing the benefits of a multiple-chainring system with tighter cassette spacing. That all changes with M9100. Shimano XTR now shows a strong preference toward a single-chainring setup, but has now added a 12th sprocket on the cassette. This allows Shimano to greatly increase the total gear range relative to the previous generation of XTR, while still keeping the jump between individual gears as small as possible.

The move to 12-speed is a first for Shimano, but follows SRAM’s Eagle family of 12-speed, 1x-specific mountain bike groupsets, and on the road, Campagnolo’s recent release of 12-speed Record and Super Record. No doubt, this is a sign of things to come for the Japanese firm.

One can’t help but draw comparisons between SRAM’s Eagle 1×12 and Shimano’s new XTR. And yet, while they’re now extremely comparable, Shimano have gone about things in the way Shimano always does – their own way.

Perhaps proving just how much of a wholesale change the new XTR groupsets are, Shimano claim zero compatibility with older generations. You can re-use your stock of gear housing and cables, and your Shimano bottom bracket, too, but that’s about it.

Hyperglide+ and Micro Spline

When SRAM first released their 1x-specific XX1 drivetrain, they did so with a wholly new freehub body design to accommodate the smaller 10T cassette sprocket. This XD driver body was left as an open standard, and literally every single hub and wheel manufacturer adopted it, with the exception of Shimano.

Hyperglide+ with Micro Spline is all new.

Shimano have followed suit in offering new XTR with a 10T small sprocket, but there’s no XD driver here. Instead, Shimano have created Hyperglide+, an entirely new freehub body standard and the next generation on the existing Hyperglide standard that has stood first since 1988. Yep, after 30 years, Shimano’s engineers are moving on.

The Hyperglide+ design is smaller in diameter to allow for that small 10T cassette sprocket. The new “Micro Spline” pattern also provides a more precise fit for the cassette and is said to remove the risk of cassette cogs digging into the surface since there’s more contact area. Like the current Hyperglide system, Hyperglide+ is also direction-specific, so there’s no risk of installing any of the cassette sprockets backwards.

In addition to the size and spline changes, Hyperglide+ is 0.55mm-wider than the current Hyperglide body. By comparison, Shimano’s move from the original Hyperglide to the road-specific 11-speed version saw the body grow by 1.8mm.

So Shimano has created a wholly new freehub standard, and everyone will just offer aftermarket freehub bodies to suit, much as what happened with SRAM’s XD open standard, right?

That was my thought, too, and unfortunately, I was wrong.

As of right now, the Hyperglide+ standard is closed, meaning any brand that tries to offer compatibility will potentially be infringing on Shimano’s patent.

Obviously, Shimano will offer new hubs to suit, and the wholly new hub design (more on this later) is a big part of the new XTR launch. However, don’t expect conversion freehubs from Shimano to make this new groupset suit your existing wheels.

All hope isn’t lost, though, as the design has been offered to a single, but large, manufacturing partner: DT Swiss. It’s expected that DT Swiss will produce aftermarket freehubs to suit its popular 3-pawl and Star Ratchet drive systems, which are also found on many other brands of hubs and wheels that use DT Swiss internals.

Given the locked-in nature of the Hyperglide+ system, it’s safe to assume that every hub manufacturer excluded from the license will work toward having an alternate option. However, it’s currently unclear if SRAM’s Eagle 12-speed cassettes use the same spacing as Shimano’s new cassette, so whether any mixing and matching of components will be possible is to be determined.

New cassettes and chain

The new XTR cassettes are lighter than ever, and unlike anything we’ve seen from Shimano to date – and not just because of the 12-speed format. The largest eight sprockets are fixed together on a “beam spider”, and the three largest of those are made of aluminium; the rest are titanium. The four remaining sprockets are individual steel bits. A freehub lockring, using the existing Shimano HG lockring tool standard, is used to pinch it all together.

The new cassette makes use of aluminium larger cogs, a first for Shimano.

There are two range options, 10-45T and 10-51T, offering 450% and 510% range, respectively. To put that into perspective, Shimano’s M9000 XTR 11-speed in a 2x format using 26/36T chainrings and the 11-40T cassette offered a 505% range.

The 10-45T cassette (10-12-14-16-18-21-24-28-32-36-40-45T) is designed to help riders better maintain their desired pedaling rhythm and cadence with smaller jumps between ratios, something cross-country and marathon racers often prize.

The 10-51T cassette (10-12-14-16-18-21-24-28-33-39-45-51T) is designed for the trail rider, enduro racer, or mountainous marathoner, offering a wider range, but with bigger jumps between its last four sprockets. By comparison, SRAM’s Eagle 12-speed cassette (10-12-14-16-18-21t-24t-28t-32t-36-42-50T) takes a different approach to spreading the 12 gears, treating the 50T as an obvious bailout gear over the next-smallest 42T cog.

Such a large cassette may seem absurd, but consider that it allows the use of a larger chainring, and that even the strongest of riders are likely to see a benefit in the ability to have such a massive gear range in a single-ring system.

The 10-51T cassette is claimed to weight 360g, which is impressively just 30g heavier than the outgoing XTR HG-9001 11-40T cassette. It’s also equal in weight to SRAM’s XX1 Eagle 10-50T cassette (although that cassette’s ingenious PowerDome machined construction allows all but one of the sprockets to be made of steel).

While Shimano haven’t yet published cog width, cog spacing, or chain width, it’s safe to assume it’s all narrower, at least compared to existing 11-speed standards. For that, there’s a new 12-speed chain and 12-speed master link.

The new 12-speed chain features a new extended inner link profile.

The new 12-speed XTR hollow pin chain sees a significant change with the inner link noticeably extended beyond the roller. Such a design offers a few benefits, including a more secure engagement with the chainring and cassette teeth. Additionally, it’s likely the additional material provides greater wear support to the roller, and in turn, the pin. In a similar way to how Shimano improved durability with their 11-speed vs. 10-speed chains by distributing the wear point from the pin to the shouldered inner plates, it’s likely similar gains will be seen again. Despite this additional material, the new narrower chain is claimed to be 5g lighter over 114 links.

As expected, both Shimano and sister parts and accessories company PRO will have an updated range of chain tools out shortly.

New hubs and no noise

Going along with the Hyperglide+ freehub is a new line-up of hubs, which replace Shimano’s long-standing conventional pawl system with a new serviceable aluminium ratchet system called Scylence.

An exploded view of the Scylence system.

The Scylence design’s interlocking toothed rings are similar in concept to that of Chris King’s Ring Drive or DT Swiss’ Star Ratchet, albeit with a few differences in function. Most notably, Scylence completely disengages the ratchet teeth when you’re not pedaling for silent running (hence the name) and presumably reduced friction. When you pedal forward, though, the hooked shape of the drive ring splines help to pull the whole mechanism together.

Scylence is also Shimano’s fastest and most secure engaging hub to date, with 60 ratchet teeth offering a crisp six-degree engagement speed (recent iterations are 10-degree, and before that they were 20-degree). I got to play with an early prototype of the hub, and while there is some friction briefly felt as the system begins to freewheel (likely not present in the production units), the hub then spins incredibly smoothly and quietly afterward (under 30 decibels). With Scylence’s whisper-quiet operation, Shimano now join Onyx in the silent hub game, in stark contrast to the very loud driver designs from Chris King, Industry Nine, and others. The quietness may take some getting used to.

Beyond the Scylence freehub mechanism, the new Shimano hubs and wheels continue on with adjustable cup-and-cone steel bearings instead of the more popular sealed cartridge bearings. From Shimano’s point of view, this open bearing system is better able to handle side forces and offers extended service intervals thanks to the multiple sealing layers. When adjusted correctly, it does roll incredibly smoothly.

However, the system carries two obvious negatives. Neglect your servicing and you risk damaging the races the bearings run on, and unlike a sealed bearing hub, that bearing race is part of the actual hub shell (although in fairness to Shimano, it’s the cone that usually wears out well before the cup part, and those are easily replaced). Secondly, where nearly every other brand has worked out how to keep up with mountain biking’s forever-changing axle standards, Shimano lock you into whatever the hub is sold with. In this sense, Shimano will offer XTR hubs in either 100 or 110mm (Boost) widths and only a 15mm diameter up front. There’s a choice of 142×12 or 148×12 (Boost) for rear hubs, but if you need anything else, such as Pivot’s new 157mm-wide Super Boost+ or a quick release, you’re out of luck.

The new hubs are available in the most common thru-axle variants only. If you require a 20mm-diameter front axle or a different width, you’ll need to look outside of the XTR range.

Available in either 28H or 32H drillings, the hubs will be available in a choice of traditional J-bend or straight-pull flanges (both designed for three-cross lacing). The latter is a new option from Shimano, with straight-pull hubs previously only being found on the company’s complete wheels.

The new freehub system has certainly helped in the weight department, with the 231g rear Boost hub dropping 46g compared to the M9000 version. The matching front hub is 16g lighter, too.

In addition to the new XTR hubs, an OE-specific (original equipment) MT900 hub will be available to bike brands with more subtle branding. This will also be available in J-bend and straight pull, and given how Shimano have closed off its Hyperglide+ freehub to others, it would be safe to assume Shimano hubs will make a resurgence in future bicycle specifications.

Direct-mount crank

In another first for Shimano, the chainring is now directly mounted to the base of the hollow aluminium crank; there’s no longer a spider incorporated into the arm. As has been seen with the likes of Rotor, Race Face, Easton, Cannondale, SRAM, and others, direct-mount chainrings offer lower weights (up to 80g saved, according to Shimano), potentially improved stiffness, and no chance of bolt failure. As an extra benefit, they’re aesthetically very clean, too.

The visual differences between the M9100 (left) and M9120 (right) crankset are minimal. However, the enduro crank uses its additional weight to offer greater stiffness, and its wider Q-factor provides more frame clearance.

Single-ring chainrings will be offered in 30T-38T sizes, in two-tooth increments, all with a refined narrow-wide tooth profile to better mesh with the new chain. The chainrings are held to the crank with a new proprietary lockring system. Shimano will include the tool with aftermarket cranks, and they’ll also be sold separately.

The new XTR looks to the past in how the non-driveside crankarm is attached, ditching Shimano’s twin pinch-bolt system and preload end cap in favour of a self-extracting 8mm hex key system similar to the old XTR M970 version (along with nearly every other mountain bike crankset on the market) And like that old XTR M970 crank, bearing preload is adjustable via a threaded ring that sits between the crankarm and the non-driveside bottom bracket bearing.

The bearing preload adjuster is said to work without the use of tools; just finger tighten and ride.

With the direct-mount system, the new M9100 crank is a substantial 100g lighter than its predecessor, going from 598g to 498g. The Q-factor on these cross-country cranks grows from 158mm to 162mm to better accommodate a wider range of frames, but never fear, a new pedal option can even everything out (more on those in a bit). The M9120 enduro version of the crank is a little wider yet, and also heavier, although the added weight supposedly makes for extra stiffness.

Both M9100 and M9120 versions will be available in Boost or non-Boost variants, with the Boost featuring 3mm of outward offset on the direct-mount chainring. Nearly all variants will be available in a choice of 165, 170, or 175mm lengths.

Lots has changed on the new XTR cranks, but the 24mm-diameter steel spindle remains. There are no changes to bottom bracket options with this generation, and if your frame features a PF30, BB386EVO or similar oversized shell, you’ll still need to find an adaptor solution from outside of Shimano’s catalogue.

Three new chain guides will be available for those seeking absolute chain security.

For riders seeking even further chain security, Shimano have a few XTR-level chain devices (SM-CD800). Available in ISCG05, Direct Mount, or E-type mount, all of these are simple resin top-only guides with a single adjustment screw.

There’s still a 2x option

It’s not evident in Australian or American markets, but there is still some demand for front shifting. And so while XTR now not only matches, but beats, the range of SRAM’s competing product, Shimano will also offer a double chainring option for XTR. For the first time in the XTR lineage, a triple option is nowhere to be seen.

Shimano XTR is now pushing toward 1x drivetrains, but without ignoring 2x users in the process. Chainring options are the biggest limitation.

This 2x setup comes with just a 38/28T chainring combo available to match the 10-45T cassette. To use this setup, a specific long-cage rear derailleur (M9120-SGS) will be needed, too.

The simpler two-chainring format has allowed Shimano to create a new simplified “Mono” front shifter to match. This features a single lever that works with a push/pull motion. Such a design is not only 20g lighter than dual-lever shifters, but it likely frees up bar space for a suspension lockout or dropper remote, too.

The front derailleur borrows a trick from the road range with an integrated cable tension adjustment. Regardless of mounting type, these feature Shimano’s compact “Side Swing” design and drop 10g over the previous generation.

Rear derailleur changes

Shimano’s relatively new direct-mount derailleur standard appears to already be coming to an end, at least for mountain bikes. The new derailleurs once again bolt to a traditional derailleur hanger without any additional connecting links. Carrying over is Shimano’s Shadow Plus layout, which keeps most of the mechanism closely tucked under the bike’s chainstay and includes an adjustable clutch mechanism on the pulley cage for chain security.

The XTR M9100 rear derailleurs are quite different to the previous generation. The medium-cage GS (left) is for use with the 10-45T cassette, while the longer SGS (right) version is designed for the 10-51T cassette.

Pulley wheels grow in size from 11T to 13T, which supposedly help with chain security, but also reduce drivetrain friction since the bigger wheels will spin slower than the smaller ones, and the chain won’t have to articulate as much as before.

In addition to the new 2x-specific derailleur mentioned previously, there will be the choice of medium (GS) or long (SGS) rear derailleur cage lengths. The shorter version is 10-45T-specific, boasting 28mm better ground clearance, the ability to run a shorter chain, and improved chain retention. Those wanting to run the 10-51T cassette will need to use the long-cage derailleur, which can be used with the smaller 10-45T cassette, too.

New I-Spec, a familiar shifter, and a dropper remote

I-Spec is Shimano’s integrated shifter and brake clamp, and was already in its third generation. New XTR M9100 marks the fourth generation of I-Spec, and, perhaps not surprisingly, the new I-Spec EV offers zero backward compatibility.

The new integrated mount was inspired by enduro riders running their brakes in a more flattened “moto” setup for less arm pump when riding steep downhill sections. Rather than compromise the brake lever or shift lever position, I-Spec EV greatly increases the adjustment range to accommodate the wide variation in setups – by four times, in fact. Whereas I-Spec II offered 15 degrees of tunability between the brake and shift lever angles, I-Spec EV now provides 60 degrees, plus an additional 2mm of lateral adjustment for 14mm in total.

Thankfully, Shimano will not force the use of its new I-Spec EV system. The shift levers will be available with a choice of either a band clamp or I-Spec EV, and likewise, the brakes can be used without the shifters, too.

The right-hand shifter itself obviously gains an extra click, but is otherwise a familiar component with Shimano’s Rapidfire Plus, 2-Way Release, and Multi-Release technologies all present. These trademarks effectively mean the shifter allows multiple shifts in either direction, and shifting to smaller cassette sprockets can be done with either your index finger or thumb.

Combined with a revised rear derailleur design, and some low-friction cable technology borrowed from Dura-Ace R9100, the new shifters claim a 20% quicker shift and 35% less shifting effort. Given how snappy M9000 is already, these are impressive figures, and certainly, less shifting effort when a clutch mechanism is involved is never a bad thing.

Shimano’s new MT800-IL dropper post remote.

Having created another I-Spec standard, Shimano will offer its own compatible dropper seatpost remote (MT800-IL) to work with the majority of cable-operated dropper posts on the market. This remote uses a 7mm cable stroke, and like Wolf Tooth’s popular ReMote, this version operates on a sealed bearing for smooth operation. This will be the only I-Spec EV-compatible dropper remote on the market, at least until all the aftermarket dropper post lever makers get their hands on one and produce their own adapters.

Wholly new brakes

Unusually, the handlebar clamp on the new Shimano M9100 and M9120 brakes has been relocated to the center of the lever body. According to Shimano, this increases the rigidity of the brake lever without changing the actual brake lever blade position or operating geometry.

Built for the cross-country racer, the M9100 brakes (left) look to save weight. The M9120 brakes (right) are all about power and control.

The two-piston caliper on the lighter M9100-series brake now features quicker brake engagement with a shorter (non-adjustable) lever stroke and 10% greater lever rigidity. The brake also gets a simpler straight hose connection to the forged aluminium caliper, instead of an adjustable banjo fitting. The stock pads are the same as M9000, meaning finned, non-finned, resin, and metallic options will all be readily available. All told, the new M9100 should save approximately 50g compared to a set of M9000 brakes, while improving function.

For riders that prize stopping power, the XTR M9120s see more substantial changes. These enduro-centric brakes move to a four-piston caliper, providing 10% more braking power than the previous XTR Trail brakes. The new caliper uses a larger brake pad, and while not confirmed, it’s suspected to be the same as the current Shimano Saint pad. Shimano will only offer finned brake pads for this model.

The M9120 brake lever also includes more tunability, with tool-free reach adjustment and free stroke adjustment (basically how far the lever moves before the master cylinder piston starts to push fluid through the hose). No matter how you set the lever up, Shimano’s Servo-Wave variable leverage ratio geometry will help boost the braking power relative to the M9100 once the pads contact the rotor. The lever is said to be 8% stiffer, too.

The new brakes are joined by new rotor designs. These borrow the Ice Tech Freeza technology from the latest Dura-Ace RT-900 rotors, with the aluminium core extending into fins below the braking surface to help dissipate heat. [/caption]

The new rotors are said to manage heat better than before, and they’re also lighter than the previous RT-99 rotors. saving 10g in a 160mm size or 30g in a 203mm. Claimed weights for the 140, 160, 180 and 203mm diameter sizes are 90, 108, 133, and 149g respectively, for 10-30g of savings depending on size. Just like the XTR hubs, these rotors will only be available in a Center Lock mount.

There’s an 11-speed version, too

Not everyone will want or need the increased range of the new XTR 12-speed cassettes; some especially aggressive riders will instead want the increased wheel rigidity and durability that come with more widely spaced spoke flanges. For them, the new XTR groupset will be offered in an 11-speed variant. This one basically just omits the largest sprocket of the 12-speed cassette, but uses the same sprocket-to-sprocket spacing. On this new “Wide Flange Hub”, the driveside spoke flange is pushed outward by 4.7mm relative to the standard 12-speed hubs.

It’s a 12-speed 11-speed drivetrain. Confused? The XTR M9125 is all about widening the hub flange spacing, and to do so, drops the largest 12th cog off the cassette.

Since the cassette spacing is unchanged, all of the other components aside from the specific hub and CS-M9110-11 cassette are shared with the 12-speed system. However, limiting the range to 10-45T allows for a mid-length GS derailleur to be used, which saves a few grams, improves ground clearance, and a chain that’s three to four links shorter.

Such a setup won’t be for everyone, of course, but for heavy-hitting enduro riders that want the very best chain security and wheel stiffness, this will likely be the hot pick.

Potential things still to come: Di2 and wheels

Shimano offered the previous generation of XTR and the current generation of XT in both mechanical and Di2 electronic options. And yet, this new release of XTR is mechanical only.

Given Shimano’s obviously massive investment in Di2 to date, it’s fairly safe to assume there’s more to come. Toby Shingleton, brand manager at Shimano Australia, pointed out that XTR M9000 mechanical was announced before its Di2 sibling, but wouldn’t reveal more than that.

I speculate it’s probably a similar story to that of Campagnolo’s latest 12-speed release, and the next generation of Di2 is taking just a little more development time than its mechanical counterpart.

It’s also quite possible that Shimano are waiting on other pieces of the puzzle, and the long-term goal of Di2 on the mountain bike was always one of healthy integration. As of right now, I’m dreaming of the thought of an integrated electronic dropper seatpost that shares system control and a battery with my rear shifting.

It seems obvious that the closed freehub system will come with a full line-up of new Shimano wheels. However, that’s not the case just yet. As of right now, Shimano have only released standalone hubs, so complete wheelsets are sure to come.

Refined pedal options

The previous XTR pedals were already benchmarks in the category, so it makes sense that the new ones are only slightly different.

With so much else changing in the groupset, the hugely popular XTR SPD pedals receive only minor refinement. Shimano will continue to offer them in a lightweight cross-country race version, and a heavier enduro version with a larger cage.

Both models have slightly wider platforms for better support and stability. The mechanism is also a little more open than before to help shed more mud. The M9120 enduro pedal also gets a new surface treatment for improved durability, and both models are more heavily machined than before. Weights have not been supplied, but we suspect they’re a few grams lighter.

For riders stressed about the increased crank Q-factor, the new XTR M9100 cross-country pedals will be offered with optional spindles that are 4mm shorter to make up the difference – just the opposite of the extended spindles available in the Dura-Ace R9100 SPD-SL road pedals.

Complete weight breakdown

All told, the new groupsets are lighter than the previous generation. The 1x cross-country configuration is approximately 150g less than before, despite the extra cassette sprocket and far greater gearing range. That figure is a far more impressive 400g (approximate) if you’re comparing the new wide-range 1×12 setup to the older 2×11 groupset. Compared to SRAM’s XX1 Eagle, the M9100 1x groupset is approximately 15g lighter (including Shimano’s new hubs compared to using the slightly lighter DT Swiss 240s with SRAM) – basically a wash.

The harder-hitting enduro-focused XTR groupset drops about 90g compared to the previous XTR Trail M9020 range. And it’s within 10g of SRAM’s X01 Eagle, though the gap widens in favour of Shimano when the brakes and hubs aren’t included.

Retail prices haven’t been confirmed yet, but it’s expected to be within 5% of the existing 9000 series. Groupsets will be available around September 2018, although some sponsored riders will likely be on it at the UCI World Cup round in Nove Mesto this weekend.

The post Shimano XTR M9100 MTB groupsets announced: 12-speed and a new freehub standard appeared first on CyclingTips.

There comes a time in the life of every cyclist when they have enough experience to form strong opinions on the parts they use. At this point, they are ready to consider a custom bike where every part is handpicked to satisfy their needs and desires. It can be a daunting proposition, but all of the extra time and effort will be rewarded with an immensely satisfying bike.

In this post, Australian tech editor Matt Wikstrom takes a look at what you need to know when selecting the parts for a road bike build. It will also serve as a handy crib sheet for any rider looking to replace any part of a road bike, be it a stem, wheels, or an entire groupset.

The most convenient way to buy a new bike is to choose one of the many factory-built bikes on offer from dozens of brands. These off-the-rack packages offer great value and prospective buyers can take the bike for a test-ride before making a decision. However, the buyer doesn’t get any say in the choice of components or the colour of the frameset, though most bike shops are normally prepared to swap the saddle or fit a different-sized stem to ensure the buyer is happy with the fit and feel of the bike.

At the other end of the spectrum, a custom build allows the buyer to tailor the bike to suit their every need. CyclingTips readers who are familiar with our Bikes of the Bunch series will know how varied the final result can be, and while a lot of these bikes feature bespoke framesets and exotic components, neither is a strict pre-requisite for a custom build.

The greatest strength and appeal of custom-building a bike is that the buyer is in charge of every aspect, starting with the goals and priorities for the build. For some, it might be embracing the latest technology and/or aerodynamics; others may choose to concentrate on weight, specific colours, or replicating a team bike; it is even possible to work with a strict budget and/or recycle parts that have been kicking around in the shed for some time.

While a custom bike provides enormous control over the final product, the buyer won’t get a chance to take the bike for a ride before they spend their money, and they won’t have a clear idea on how the bike will look until is has been assembled. Thus, the whole process requires a leap of faith, but there is an enormous thrill in creating a bike in this way. If nothing else, the owner engages with every part of the bike in a way that is not possible for a factory-built bike, and will have a few stories to tell about how it all came together.

We all know about the convenience of online shopping, so the only challenge with ordering the parts for a custom build is making sure the right parts end up at your door.

In the past, buyers looking for a custom road bike relied heavily on a good bike shop to obtain all the parts they needed, otherwise they spent a lot of time travelling to, or phoning, different shops to track down specific brands. Now, online shopping has simplified that process, and while shoppers may spend long hours visiting a multitude of shops, there is no need to leave their home, and everything can be delivered directly to them if desired – but of course, that’s assuming they already know exactly what they need, and don’t need to consult someone with more knowledge and experience.

Getting started on a custom bike build

The logical starting point for any build is the frameset. As the core of the bike, it provides a template to guide the build. There are no standards for many parts of a bike, just a discrete number of options with very little redundancy, and thus, it is far easier to pick parts to match the specifications of a frameset rather than the other way around. This applies to any kind of bike, though for the purposes of this article, I will concentrate on the details that are most relevant to road bikes (a category which also includes all-road and gravel bikes).

There’s another good reason to start with the frame: it provides the buyer with a maximum amount of freedom when choosing a suitable frame size and preferred geometry. This is perhaps the strongest reason to consider a custom build, because the buyer can hand-pick a frameset that promises to fulfil their needs and desires.

For those riders with a good understanding of their position, fit, and handling preferences, it shouldn’t be difficult to identify suitable candidates by browsing through online geometry charts for stock framesets. Detailed specifications are normally available, too, so that prospective buyers can weigh up all of the options before making a purchase.

The frameset is the core of any custom-built bike, and picking out the parts to finish the build is a matter of matching the specifications for each part of the frame and fork.

For those with needs that fall outside of the norm, a bespoke frame may be a better choice. Not only will a frame builder be able to fashion the frameset that perfectly suits the fit of the buyer, they can also accommodate any preferences the customer might have for the final aesthetic (such as a sloping versus horizontal top tube) and specific components. Indeed, the customer often has the freedom to dictate the specifications for the frameset, including fittings for racks, fenders, and/or additional bidon cages.

Finding a suitable, even compatible, frame builder can be difficult, though. This is where local bike shows can come in handy such as the North American Handmade Bicycle Show, Handmade Bicycle Show Australia, UK’s Bespoked, and Germany’s Berlinerfahrradschau, to name a few. Attendees are able to view the work of a variety of frame builders in one venue, and often have a chat directly with the builders themselves, to help with their decision.

What about the fork?

For many buyers, there won’t be any need to decide on a fork for the frame. This is especially true for contemporary carbon framesets where the fork is often integrated with the design of the frame and there is possibly no alternative to use another brand or model. Bespoke frames offer more freedom, as do frames that make use of a conventional head tube and a common axle-to-crown measurement.

Almost all aftermarket road forks are made from carbon fibre, and while there are differences in styling, there is really only one main feature that buyers need to pay attention to — the amount of rake — which will affect the handling of the bike and the amount of toe overlap with the front wheel.

In this regard, it is worth stressing that even small changes in fork rake can have a noticeable impact on the steering of a bike. Framebuilders always design the geometry of the frame around a specific fork rake to yield a suitable amount of steering trail, so buyers should have an understanding of both before they tackle this job for themselves.

Spare a thought for the components before deciding on a frameset

Road bikes have become more diverse in recent years, giving rise to specialised designs that have been honed for aerodynamics, comfort, mixed surfaces, and dedicated off-road riding. At the same time, the introduction of electronic shifting, disc brakes, and 1x transmissions has resulted in a variety of dedicated fittings with very little redundancy or interchangeability. For example, a frameset that has been designed for rim brakes cannot be converted for disc brakes (or vice versa); likewise, the ports required to internally route the wires for an electronic groupset cannot normally be added to a frame with fittings for mechanical derailleurs.

Dedicated cable guides are required for mechanical groupsets at various points on the frameset, starting with the head (or down) tube.

Electronic groupsets require routing options that suit wires rather than cables.

Some framesets are supplied with interchangeable fittings so that wires and cables can both be routed through the frame, which provides the buyer with more freedom when choosing components for the transmission.

Each type of brake calliper, like this centre-mount rim calliper, requires a dedicated fitting, so only one type of brake can be fitted to each frameset.

Early iterations of road disc bikes, such as this Specialized Tarmac, featured post mounts for disc brake callipers.

Virtually all road disc bikes are now making use of Shimano’s flat mount design for the disc brake callipers.

The amount of room in between the stays of the frame (as well as the fork legs) strictly limits the size of the tyres that can be used.

There are other considerations, too, such as wheel size and the amount of tyre clearance that will be required. The number and size of the chainrings and sprockets is also important. All will have an impact on the design and specifications of the frame, so there really is no way to select, or order, a frameset without giving some thought to the components that will be needed to complete the build.

Flowchart 1: overview of the options for the brakes, transmission, and wheels.

Key frame and fork specifications

The key specifications for a frame and fork concern the head tube, fork steerer, bottom bracket, and seat tube. For current factory-built framesets, this information is normally freely available, but there are times when this information may be incomplete, or lacking, such as classic road framesets from last century. In this situation, the owner will have to resort to inspecting the frame and taking measurements to determine the specifications before they start selecting suitable components.

As mentioned above, there are no universal specifications for frames and forks, and while things like bottom bracket shells always seem to be evolving, the number of options at least remains reasonably small and always discrete. As a result, some specifications can be determined by an experienced eye (such as a mechanic); otherwise, a vernier calliper will be required to make accurate measurements of the internal and/or external diameters of the head tube, fork steerer, bottom bracket shell, and seat tube.

Mating the fork with the frame

Many road framesets are supplied with a headset, but in those instances where one is not, the head tube and fork will need to be inspected and measured. There are two general types of headset, threaded and threadless, and a quick inspection of the fork steerer is all that is required to decide the matter.

The overall size of the headset is defined in terms of the external diameter of the fork steerer, and there are three common sizes: 1in/25.4mm, 1.125in/28.6mm, and 1.25inch/31.8mm. In some cases, this diameter will be uniform for the length of the steerer, but tapered designs are more common. In this instance, the diameter of the fork steerer increases as it approaches the fork crown, and the headset will comprise of a mixture of bearing sizes.

Another important distinction for a headset concerns the way the bearings are retained in the head tube using press-fit cups or integrated bearing seats. For the former, the internal diameter of either end of the head tube will determine what kind of cups can be fitted; the internal diameter of the head tube is also important for the latter, but the angle of the seats and the overall depth must also be determined.

Flowchart 2: overview of the options for road forks (left) and headsets (right).

Every headset requires a crown race at the base of the fork steerer, and in many instances, one must be fitted, however integrated races are becoming more common. For those forks that require a crown race, the internal diameter of the race must match the base of the steerer, which can be easily measured. While the options for crown races has not been standardised, the number of variations is relatively small and largely dictated by the lower headset bearing.

With all of this in mind, it’s fair to say that identifying a suitable headset for a frameset can be a little tricky. Fortunately, Park Tools, Cane Creek, and Chris King have developed online tools to help with this process, but when in doubt, consult an experienced mechanic.

Before leaving the topic of headsets, it is important to note that, with almost no exceptions, threadless forks need to be fitted with a threaded anchor for the compression bolt of the headset. These usually take the form of an expanding plug for carbon steerers, or a star nut for steel or alloy steerers. In both instances, buyers need only match the plug or nut to one of three sizes: 1in, 1.125in, or 1.25in.

The combination of a threaded 1in headset and a quill stem served the front end of road bikes for several decades.

Larger fork steerer diameters, threadless headsets, and clamp-on stems are now de rigueur for road bikes.

A tapered head tube flares towards the lower headset bearing.

Many carbon frames, like Parlee’s Altum, integrate the seats for the headset bearings into the head tube for a seamless finish.

Canyon has long utilised an oversized 1.25in fork steerer that requires larger bearings and a larger stem clamp. Giant does the same with its Overdrive 2 fork/headset design.

The bottom bracket and crank compatibility

There are almost a dozen different bottom bracket types for road bikes, and that number only grows when off-road bikes and fat bikes are added. That range can be divided into two broad types, threaded and threadless (or press-fit), which are then further differentiated on the basis of the internal diameter and width of the shell.

Flowchart 3: overview of the options for the bottom bracket shell (left) and crank axles (right).

Fitting bearings to the bottom bracket shell is only one half of the equation when building the bike because they must suit the cranks as well. More specifically, the internal diameter of the bearings must match the diameter and design of the crank axle, and there are no standards. Rather, most are proprietary designs limited to specific brands, and while those brands may sell matching bearing sets, none are able to cater to all of the bottom bracket shells in use today.

Fortunately, there are a few companies — C-Bear, Kogel, Enduro, and Wheels Manufacturing, amongst others — that not only specialise in creating bearing sets that allow various crank designs to be installed in different bottom bracket shells, but also provide detailed charts for identifying a suitable product. With that said, this is one area of a bike where incompatibilities frequently arise and it may not be possible to fit some brands of cranks to a given frame (e.g. any crank with a 30mm axle cannot be fitted to a Trek road frame with a BB90 bottom bracket).

A standard threaded bottom bracket shell is pretty easy to identify by eye, but a couple of measurements are required to distinguish this BSA-threaded shell from an Italian-threaded shell.

Many carbon frames have threadless bottom bracket shells but discerning one design from another can be difficult on the basis of sight alone.

Some frames declare the specifications for the bottom bracket shell, but this is unusual.

In some cases, labels printed on the frame aren’t entirely accurate since the Synapse shown here actually makes use of a BB30A bottom bracket shell that is 5mm wider than BB30.

Aftermarket bottom bracket bearing sets allow cranksets to be mated with specific bottom bracket shells. In this case, this bearing set is designed for installing a Shimano crankset into a frame with a BB30 shell, a combination which is not supported by Shimano’s range of bearing sets.

The seat tube

The specifications for the seat tube are important for the saddle and the front derailleur. Regarding the former, the majority of frames have a seat tube into which a seatpost is inserted for attaching the saddle. In this instance, the internal diameter (and shape) of the seat tube dictates the size (and shape) of the seatpost. While there are some common seatpost sizes, such as 27.2mm and 31.6mm, there is a large number of possibilities, and all must be matched precisely (e.g. a 27.0mm seatpost cannot substitute for a 27.2mm post).

Flowchart 4: overview of the options for the seatpost (left) and seatpost clamp (right).

Some frames employ a proprietary (non-round) seatpost designs or have integrated designs where the seatpost is basically just an extension of the seat tube. In both instances, a suitable post or fittings are normally supplied with the frame, however the amount of offset for the saddle and the range of colours are normally limited to whatever the frame manufacturer is prepared to offer.

For those frames that must be fitted with a conventional seatpost, a clamp will be required for the frame unless one is supplied or integrated with the seat tube. If a clamp is required, then it must match the external diameter at the top of the seat tube, which can be easily measured with a vernier calliper.

The external diameter of the seat tube is also important for fitting a front derailleur (if required). Some road frames are fitted with a slotted tab, to which the front derailleur is attached. In the absence of this tab, a clamp will be required, and there are three common sizes: 28.6mm, 31.8mm, and 34.9mm.

For frames with a standard seatpost, finding a suitable post and clamp is a matter of matching the internal and external diameters of the seat tube, respectively.

An integrated seatpost must be cut to suit the owner’s saddle height, though an adjustable topper can be used with some designs to provide a small range of adjustment.

Trek’s Madone features a semi-integrated seatmast into which a shorter post is fitted and adjusted to suit the rider’s saddle height.

Aerodynamic seatpost designs and integrated seatpost clamps are now a common sight on road bikes, but the proprietary designs limit aftermarket options.

The seat tubes of some frames are fitted with a slotted tab for attaching a front derailleur with a “braze-on” fitting.

In the absence of a tab, a front derailleur with a dedicated clamp can be fitted to the seat tube.

Alternatively, a braze-on front derailleur can be fitted to the seat tube using an adapter clamp.

Choosing a groupset

A groupset comprises all of the shifting, braking, and transmission components for a bike, and for many buyers, is the most convenient and cost-effective way to obtain the majority of the parts required to complete a custom build. There are three major brands to choose from — Shimano, SRAM, and Campagnolo — and all have a range of options to suit different builds and budgets. Other brands such as Rotor, FSA, Miche, SunRace and MicroShift offer a smaller range of groupsets or transmission/braking components.

We’ve already covered all of the important details in our post on what to know when buying a groupset, but in brief, there are two sets of criteria that a groupset must satisfy: first, it must match the specifications for the frameset so that all of the components can be fitted; and second, it must satisfy the needs of the rider, which can be based on weight, performance, and/or price.

It is the latter that provides the clearest distinction between the different levels of groupsets on offer from each manufacturer, and for many buyers, the decision in favour of one level over another will be driven by budget. Since the number of features and overall weight are closely associated with price, it’s a sound strategy. As for the choice of brand, this is a matter that can be decided on the basis of personal preference and aesthetics because there is little that separates the overall performance of each.

There is no need to buy a complete groupset when choosing the parts for a custom build, and indeed, it is possible to mix components from different brands. This is something that we have covered in detail in our post on mixing road groupsets; in short, there are a variety of incompatibilities by which buyers must abide.

Any brand of groupset typically comprises the same core group of components that serve the braking and transmission of the bike.

A standard rear derailleur (left) features a short cage that is suited to sprocket sizes up to 28-29T; buyers hoping to use larger sprockets will need a longer cage, but this option is not offered for all groupsets. A standard front derailleur will work with compact, semi-compact, and standard chainring sizes, so the only choice relates to the frame fitting, braze-on (shown, right) or a clamp.

Any rear derailleur will fit any road frame unless the frame employs a hanger designed for Shimano’s new direct mount design, like this Cube.

The brake callipers must match the fittings on the frameset, but some groupsets only cater for a single option, and in the case of Campagnolo’s Potenza groupset, that is centre-mount rim brakes.

Specifying a crankset for a groupset comes down to two aspects, crank length…

…and the size of the chainrings. Larger chainrings produce higher gear ratios that promise more speed for a given cadence, but are harder to push up hills.

Finally, there is the choice of sprocket sizes, which start at 11T and go up to 28T or more, though the exact range of choices can vary from one groupset to the next.

At the very least, the derailleurs must be matched to the shifter/brake levers as well as the number of sprockets (and to a lesser extent, chainrings) present in the transmission. By contrast, there is much more freedom when it comes to choosing a crankset, and to a lesser extent, rim brake callipers. Disc brake callipers, on the other hand, usually must be matched to the levers.

Regardless of how the groupset is assembled, every buyer will have to face two important decisions before heading to the checkout: crank length and gearing. These are both topics that we have covered in detail in our posts on the importance of crank length and understanding gear ratios, so I will only mention them briefly. In the case of the former, a professional bike-fitter will be able to provide advice on the ideal crank length for an individual, while the latter will depend upon the rider’s local terrain, preferred cadence, and his or her capabilities.

Understanding gear ratios is not only important for choosing the chainrings and sprockets for a groupset, it will also have a bearing on the choice of derailleurs. This is particularly important for the rear derailleur, where a longer cage will be required to use sprockets larger than 28T. For those building an all-road or gravel bike, larger sprockets and sub-compact cranks will be a necessity, not only for tackling unpaved roads, but for contending with the effect of larger tyres on every gear ratio.

Flowchart 5: overview of the options for each part of a groupset.

Contact points

Deciding on a handlebar, stem, saddle, and pedals for a new build is largely a personal matter, but there are a few points to keep in mind when choosing each:

Stem: In the first instance, the stem must match the fork of the bike, so a threadless fork demands a threadless stem, while a threaded fork requires a quill stem. In both cases, the diameter of the fork steerer is important, though it is the outer diameter (1in/25.4mm, 1.125in/28.6mm, 1.25in/31.8mm) that is important for a threadless stem, and the inner diameter (22.2/25.4/28.6mm) that is important for quill stems.

Flowchart 6: overview of the options for the stem.

The stem clamp diameter is also important and must match the handlebars. The majority of quill stems have a 26.0mm clamp but some Cinelli stems can have a 26.4mm clamp. That 26.0mm diameter was once the most common handlebar clamp diameter for threadless stems, too, but it has been replaced by 31.8mm (strictly speaking, it is 31.75mm; most brands round up but Deda rounds down, hence its 31.7mm clamp diameter). Easton and Deda also offer a 35.0mm clamp diameter for some threadless stems, but the range of products is very small.

The only other measurements that are important to a stem are the length (measured centre-to-centre) and angle. Both are important to the final position of the handlebars, and thus, need to be selected according to the needs of the individual. Stem lengths generally increase in 10mm increments while there are normally just a few stem angles available (typically ±6°, ±8°, ±17°).

Finally, for those working with a threadless fork and stem, a set of spacers may be required to adjust the height of the handlebars. Spacers are available in at least a few heights (3, 5, 10, and 25mm are the most common) and must match the diameter of the fork steerer.

A tradition quill stem mated with a 1in threaded headset.

A threadless stem with a traditional angle (-17°).

Deda’s Trentacinque bar and stem makes use of a 35mm clamp diameter.

Handlebars: As mentioned above, the handlebars must match the clamp diameter of the stem. The other important measurements relate to the overall width of the bars along with the amount of reach and drop. The choice of each largely depends upon the rider’s fit, although personal preference (and perhaps flexibility) can play a role in deciding the amount of width and drop for the bars.

It is worth noting that there is variation on how the width of drop bars are measured. Traditionally, it was measured at the end of the bars, typically centre-to-centre, but some brands chose to use total width (outside-to-outside) instead, which would add an extra 20mm. The introduction of flared drops has confused this further, since the bars will be narrower where the levers are mounted, so some brands have taken to sizing their bars according to the width at the lever mounts (measured centre-to-centre).

Saddle: Deciding on a saddle is a highly personal matter. The overall width of the saddle has an impact on its fit, as do its contours, however there is no ready way to identify a good match without trial and error.

It is important to pay attention to the size of the saddle rails. All metal rails have a 7mm diameter, while carbon rails have a rectangular cross-section that measures 7x9mm. For some seatposts (such as Enve and Specialized, and Trek seat mast toppers), a different set of fittings will be required for carbon rails.

Enve is one brand of seatpost where different fittings are used depending on the size of the saddle rails.

The amount of offset for the saddle clamp, which ranges 0-35mm, depending on the design, will dictate how much setback can be achieved for the saddle.

In recent years, manufacturers have concentrated on creating seatposts that are more compliant, with some, like Canyon, going so far as to create an active suspension unit. Their VCLS 2.0 post will fit a standard 27.2mm diameter seat tube.

Seatpost: As mentioned above, for those frames that make use of an adjustable seatpost, the diameter of the post must match the internal diameter of the seat tube precisely. Posts also vary in their length and the amount of offset for the saddle clamp. Frames with a sloping top tube will require a longer post (up to 400mm) than those with a horizontal top tube, while the amount of offset will dictate how much setback can be provided for the saddle. For those riders that require a lot of saddle setback, a post with 25mm of offset will be a better choice than a zero-offset post, however the final choice will depend upon the angle of the seat tube.

Pedals: Choosing a pedal is largely a matter of personal preference. One thread size fits all road cranksets, however some brands (such Shimano and Speedplay) offer longer axle lengths for those that need a wider stance on the bike.

Wheels

Compared to other parts of the bike, like the bottom bracket, the wheel fittings for road frames have remained fairly static, but there have been some changes in recent years. Contemporary road frames (with rim brakes) and forks accept 9mm quick-release axles with 100mm spacing for the front hub and 130mm for the rear hub. Looking back at earlier eras (pre-dating the 8-speed era), the only difference concerns spacing for the rear hub, which was once 120mm (5/6-speed) or 126mm (7-speed).

Up until recently, all road bikes featured open dropouts (see left) designed for quick-release axles. The introduction of disc brakes has seen a move to closed dropouts (right) and thru-axles.

The introduction of disc brakes to road bikes has been accompanied with new wheel fittings employing thru-axles. The design is inherently safer and better suited to contending with the forces of braking than quick-release axles. Hub spacing for the front hub remains 100mm while it has increased to 142mm for the rear hub.

Thru-axles with a 12mm diameter have become a common choice for road disc bikes, however some road disc frames employ quick-release axles with 135mm rear hub spacing; others have opted for a 12mm thru-axle for the front wheel and a 135mm quick-release axle for the rear; and in some instances, a 15mm diameter thru-axle, borrowed from mountain bikes, may be used for the front wheel in combination with a 12 x 142mm thru-axle for the rear.

Flowchart 7: overview of the options for wheel axles.

The choice of any wheelset (or hubs) must abide by the frameset specifications for the axle fittings, however it is possible to convert many disc-brake hubs with a quick-release axle to accept a 12mm (or even 15mm) thru-axle (and vice versa). There is no way to convert a rim brake hub to accept a disc rotor, though. Thus, it is equally important that the wheelset also suits the braking system (i.e. rim brakes versus disc) that will be fitted to the bike.

The other part of the hub to pay attention to is the freehub body, which must match the choice of groupset (or transmission components). Buyers choosing to use a Shimano or SRAM groupset require a Shimano/SRAM-compatible freehub that suits the number of sprockets to be installed; Campagnolo groups require a different freehub body design, as does SRAM’s wide-range XD cassettes designed for 1x transmissions.

Flowchart 8: overview of options for wheel hubs.

Almost all road bikes must be fitted with a 700C wheel, but some newer gravel frames (such as the 3T Exploro, Ibis Hakka MX, and others) can accommodate 650B (aka 27.5in) wheels. Randonneur framesets can also make use of this smaller wheel size, while a bespoke frame can be designed around 650C wheels to suit small riders.

For most shoppers, a factory-built wheelset will be the most accessible and convenient option for any build, but a custom-built product shouldn’t be overlooked. There are strengths and weaknesses associated with each approach, but the latter shines when it comes to meeting the specific needs of the rider and finding a colour palette that suits the final build.

One of the major choices for a wheelset concerns the rims. Aluminium alloy remains the most common choice of material, but carbon fibre has become increasingly popular over the last decade or so with racers and enthusiasts alike. We have discussed all of the strengths and weaknesses of these rims in our post on the value of carbon wheelsets, and in short, carbon fibre rims have a lot to offer in terms of performance (especially in terms of weight and aerodynamics), but they come at a significant cost.

Carbon wheelsets are arguably best suited to the new wave of road disc bikes because there is no risk of heat generation at the tyre/rim interface.

The major performance downside is that the material is not well suited to rim brakes, but this issue disappears altogether for disc brake-equipped bikes. By contrast, alloy rims are very well suited to rim brakes and they are still hard to beat on the basis of value.

Whatever the rim material, buyers will need to match the wheels to the tyre system (clinchers, tubulars, or tubeless tyres) that they want to use. This is normally a straightforward choice that can be decided on the basis of personal preference.

Finally, there is the width of the rims to consider, which has been growing in recent years. We’ve covered this topic in a previous post on the thinking behind wider road rims, which can generally be considered an improvement over narrow rims. The extra width may not be compatible with some older framesets and rim brake callipers, though.

Tyres

As mentioned above, road riders have a choice of three tyre systems — clinchers, tubulars, or tubeless tyres — and while there is an amount of interchangeability between clinchers and tubeless tyres, the choice of tyre system ultimately rests with the wheels.

There are plenty of brands and models of tyres to choose from, and aside from taking care to match the size of the wheel, buyers will need to pay attention to the width of the tyre. In the past, tyre clearance for some road framesets may have been as little as 23mm, however the majority of contemporary road framesets will accommodate tyres up to 28mm wide. This can be greater for disc-brake-equipped bikes, especially for all-road, cyclocross, and gravel bikes.

Importantly, there is only a weak correlation between the printed size of a tyre (e.g. 25c) and the actual width of the tyre once inflated on a wheel. That’s because it is largely dependent upon the width of the rim bed, and to a lesser extent, final tyre pressure. Wider rims and higher pressures produce wider measured tyre widths, but there is no way to easily predict the result for any given rim-tyre combination without having the specific combination of parts on hand, so some trial-and-error may be required by those working with limited tyre clearance.

The same 23c clincher tyres are shown here, but it measures 25mm-wide when mounted on a rim with a 20mm bed (left) and 22.5mm-wide on a more traditional 15mm rim bed (right).

Finally, every tyre system has accessories. Clinchers need inner tubes, tubulars require glue (or tape), and valves and sealant are necessary for tubeless tyres. In each case, there are a variety of products to choose from and buyers will need to ensure that the valve stems match the depth of the rims that they intend to use.

Finishing Touches

There are a variety of ways to add a personal touch to a custom build (or your current ride) and it’s worth taking the time to dwell upon these minor details.

Custom paintwork for the frameset will always produce a striking result, and some components, such as the stem, bars, seatpost, and hubs can also painted to match. Artisans like Busyman Bicycles can re-cover the saddle with a custom leather finish and furnish the bike with matching bar tape, pump strap, and even a saddle bag, but all of these touches will add to the cost of the build.

There is no need to refinish the frame and parts, though, when some discerning choices can work just as well. In some cases, it might be enough to make use of a suite of parts from the same brand; in others, removing labels and logos can be just as effective. Collecting together a group of parts with the same kind of finish (e.g. matte black) also works, too. Making these kind of choices will require some visualisation and a bit of faith, though a dry build with some parts can be helpful.

Alloy parts, such as this Potenza crankset, can be polished and pantographed for a unique finish.

Carbon parts can be painted to match the frame.

Custom handlebar end caps are relatively inexpensive.

Anodised components can be used to add some striking colour to a build.

Segmented alloy cable housing is also available in a variety of anodised colours.

More recently, anodising has been used to add colour to titanium frames with some stunning results.

The saddle is another place where a personal touch can be added.

Personalised stem caps are relatively inexpensive and offer a wide range of possibilities.

There are all sorts of bar tape on offer that can be used to provide a distinctive touch to the bike.

Perhaps the easiest way to personalise any build is to pay attention to the bar tape and bottle cages. There’s an enormous range of options for both products, including different colours, materials, and designs that can be used to complement the rest of the build.

Another simple touch is to replace standard black brake and gear housing with coloured housing. Alternatively, segmented aluminium housing from brands like Nokon, Alligator, and Jagwire can sometimes be had in different colors. It is also possible to swap a variety of bolts for different colours such as black titanium and anodised alloy for a little extra bling. Similarly, there are some exotic chains on the market from KMC and YBN that will have the same effect.

One final touch that is worth considering is custom stickers for the frame. For some, this might mean simply putting their name on the top tube of the frame, but others might find more appeal with a quote or message to help their motivation. The same thing can be done with custom bar ends and a top cap for threadless headsets.

Bringing it all together

Once all of the parts have been collected (or delivered), the obvious strategy for assembling the bike is to find a good mechanic. Some bike shops won’t welcome a new customer with a box full of parts acquired from online sources, so it might be worth calling around and getting a few quotes first. Otherwise, hunt down a service-only business where you can talk directly with the mechanic that will do the work for you; it may even be possible to watch the bike being built.

For those that have some mechanical aptitude, it’s worth having a crack at it because there is enormous satisfaction in building your own bike. An experienced mechanic can be enlisted to take care of any jobs that need specialised tools (e.g. installing headset cups) and they can check over the build and/or take care of any fine-tuning to make sure the bike is road-worthy.

Final thoughts

In broad terms, building a bike from the ground up is not a difficult thing to do. After all, the number of parts is reasonably small and there is a healthy industry that provides a wide range of products to suit a variety of needs. The rise of online shopping and easy access to international sellers has made it incredibly convenient to source parts for a custom build, so the only real barrier is one of familiarity with the variety of specifications for each part of a road bike.

One way to gain that familiarity is to get some hands-on experience replacing a groupset or resurrecting a classic road frameset. Alternatively, a lot can be learned by going through the process of composing a dream build and doing a bit of virtual shopping to complete the project (I’ve known some people to maintain spreadsheets with a diligent accounting of both the cost and weight of such builds). There are even a few online bike configurators (Trek’s Project One is outstanding) that can be used to visualise different builds and/or experiment with different finishes.

Every custom build is an act of creation that can be as satisfying for a framebuilder as their customer.

There are a multitude of ways that a frameset can be finished.

Sometimes, less is more.

And sometimes, more is more, depending on the owner’s tastes.

Some custom builds are driven by a strong theme like this tribute to Prince.

Racing stripes borrowed from auto racing always look great on a bike.

Subdued branding and a gold chain work brilliantly on this bike.

Highly detailed paintwork is always eye-catching.

Some old team bikes never lose their class, even when built with modern components.

In the end, it’s the connection that the owner enjoys that is most important to any custom build.

The post From the ground up: How to pick the parts for a custom road bike build appeared first on CyclingTips.

With what feels like an increasing number of incidents happening on our roads, many cyclists are taking additional measures to ensure they’re seen day and night, and that they have proof if an incident does occur. Combining an action camera and light into a single device, the Fly12 (front) and Fly6 (rear) are certainly unique products.

The original Fly6, an Australian invention, successfully used Kickstarter to launch in the heyday of crowdfunded campaigns. Since then, the small Australian start-up has vastly grown its international reach and even listed on the Australian Stock Exchange (ASX). More recently, the company released its largest product update yet, wholly new Fly6 (rear) and Fly12 (front) units, each with a “CE” (Connected Edition) moniker.

The original, and interim, generations of the Fly6 were innovative and unique, however, at least for me, the lack of a light bright enough for daytime visibility was always a deal-breaker, especially when you considered the size and weight of the unit. In contrast, the original Fly12 was a more polished product, however camera and battery tech keeps improving at a rapid rate, and the new Fly6 CE and Fly12 CE take advantage of both (plus more).

What’s new?

Almost everything, really.

In short, the Fly6 and Fly12 have both had major overhauls, including a facelift with more compact cases. Light output, image quality, connectivity options, mounting versatility, battery life (for the Fly6 CE) and price are all up. Weight and size are down (as is battery life for the Fly12 CE).

What hasn’t changed is the key design elements. Both are still safety cameras first and foremost, so the camera automatically turns on with the unit, and unlike the lights, there’s no way to turn it off. The strong battery life and video looping with incident protection (protecting recently recorded footage if the camera is left on its side for long enough) both remain, ensuring that memory card size is never an issue, and if an incident does occur, the footage won’t be lost. Likewise, IP56 water protection with nano-coated internals remain.

Both units now enjoy Bluetooth and ANT+ connectivity, with the former offering easy setting control through a phone, while the latter is used for linking with compatible cycling head units (currently only Garmin) for automated control. Battery charging and data transfer is now quicker and faster thanks to the new USB-C standard, and there is an option for “6-Axis digital image optimisation” for smoothing recorded footage on both devices.

Both units now share the same 1/8-turn mount type. While similar, it’s not compatible with popular GPS computer mounts.

Not all of the features that defined earlier versions of the Fly6 and Fly12 have been carried forward, though. In an effort to keep the final cost of each unit down, MicroSD memory cards are no longer supplied with the devices, so buyers will have to pay for their own. Wi-Fi connectivity has been removed from the Fly12, too, and the only way to transfer footage for editing is to plug the device, or memory card, directly into a phone, laptop or desktop.

For the Fly6 CE, the fourth generation unit is now slimmer, darker, and more modern-looking. At 112g (126g including mount), weight is only a smidge better than previous generations, but it achieves that while adding a whole host of new features and improved performance. Light output gets a significant boost from 30 to 100 lumens, while maximum video recording resolution jumps from 720p to full-HD 1080p at 60 frames per second (fps) to match the Fly12. All of these changes come with an increase in battery capacity, allowing the device to record for seven hours (without the light in use), approximately an hour longer than its predecessor.

The new Fly12 CE is noticeably more compact than the original Fly12 (left).

Compared to the new Fly6 CE, the Fly12 CE receives fewer updates. The outer casing is boxier and more compact, mirroring the styling for the Fly6 CE, and saves 48g for a weight of 195g. The charge port and MicroSD slot shift to the side of the unit and sit behind a mechanical latch. Light output is given a welcome boost from 400 lumens to 600 lumens, but the only update to video performance is the new digital image stabilisation (which effectively works through compressing the footage).

Battery capacity has been sacrificed for the Fly12 CE, a necessary trade-off to keep the device reasonably light and compact. Compared to the original Fly12 that boasted 10 hours of recording, the new version offers eight hours, yet that’s nearly a Lord of the Rings marathon longer than what a GoPro can manage.

Fitting and setup

New versus old. The Fly6 CE (top) employs a Velcro strap rather than a silicone band.

The Fly6 CE is a cinch to fit using a velcro strap with a 1/8-turn mount. Two different silicone spacers are provided along with three adapters to suit a variety of seatpost shapes. From 25.4mm round posts, to Giant’s D-Fuse (squared back shape), to deep aero posts, I was able to fit the Fly6 securely without issue. It’s a huge improvement from the original rubber strap system that was clunky, fragile, and offered limited compatibility.

The strap does have some minor quirks, however, with the silicon backing to the velcro strap peeling away with repeated use, while the strap was too long for some seatposts. In all my trials, the excess could be tucked out of the way, though some may prefer to trim it to length, assuming that it won’t be needed for other bikes. Spare straps are readily available for purchase at a fair price; Cycliq also sells a pannier mount and there’s a saddle rail mount on the way, too.

The handlebar mount takes up a fair bit of room, but the Fly12 CE comes with a GoPro adaptor that can be used with a variety of out-front computer mounts, like this one from Giant.

Fitting the Fly12 CE is even easier. The included 31.8/26mm plastic handlebar mount is extremely simple and effective, however, it does require a round handlebar and a reasonable amount of bar space given the device’s 57mm width. If bar space or shape is an issue, then the GoPro adaptor that is included with the unit will come in handy. It’s a welcome extra that allows you to use a number of out-front combination mounts, such as those from Cycliq, K-Edge, BarFly or similar. Buyers that want to get creative with collecting video footage should keep in mind that the Fly12 CE sits central to its mount, and it’s not nearly as compact as a GoPro, so there will be some places where it simply won’t fit with ease, such as a chest mount.

Safety tethers are included with the Fly6 CE and Fly12 CE. I didn’t put them to use, but if you’re worried the mounts aren’t secure enough, or you never want to see your device sliding across the pavement, then the option is there.

The phone app offers simple control over a variety of features.

New microSD cards were recognised immediately and setting up each device was relatively easy using the CycliqPlus app on iOS (also available on Android). Bluetooth synching was extremely easy, and from there you can control the specific settings, one device at a time. There’s also a desktop app, for Windows and for Mac.

If a device firmware update is needed, then it’s far from an automated process. Two separate files must be downloaded with a Mac or PC computer and then dragged and dropped onto the plugged-in device in stages. No, it’s not hard to do, and Cycliq provides clear instructions for the process, but it certainly feels like a dated process, especially when many other Bluetooth-equipped devices manage such updates through phone apps. Thankfully such updates should be few and far between.

Lighting and battery performance

The Fly6 CE (center) packs enough punch to have you clearly seen in the day. To its right sits a favourite daytime-running rear light, the Bontrager Flare R.

It’s simple. The new Fly6 CE is a vastly better light than any previous generation Fly6 — and ignoring the fact that it’s also a camera – it’s simply a good safety light. With a claimed 100 lumen output, the light is clearly visible from a fair distance in broad daylight, and once the sun goes down, it’s hard to miss (obviously). Side visibility isn’t class-leading, however there is just enough light from in front of the casing to make itself known.

The Fly6 CE offers three light modes: steady, flashing and strobe. Each mode offers three levels of brightness, and there’s an option of using the camera without the light at all. All of these modes and brightness levels can be selected within the CycliqPlus app, and in my case, I turned off a number of options to leave just four choices to toggle through.

The jump in light output for the Fly12 CE may not be quite as impressive as the Fly6 CE but 600 lumens is still plenty bright.

Compared to the 300% bump in output for the Fly6 CE, the 50% increase for the Fly12 CE is somewhat underwhelming. Still, 600 lumens is easily bright enough for daytime use, and it’s enough to get you home safely in the dark. However, by today’s standards, it’s a little weak as a means of revealing the path in front, especially if you’re seeking a light for night-time mountain biking.

Like the Fly6 CE, the Fly12 CE has three light modes (steady, flashing and strobe) with a beam pattern that offers a bright central spot that is just large enough to see the road directly in front. The light then has a softer halo around it that helps with side visibility and illuminating street signs.

As mentioned above, battery life for the Fly6 CE and Fly12 CE is seven and eight hours, but that only applies to the camera when the lights aren’t in use. When I tested the brightest flash settings, the Fly6 CE disco’d for exactly five hours and 30 minutes, with the camera shutting off approximately 90 minutes earlier in order to keep the light going. I didn’t have the same luck testing the run time for the Fly12 CE because the device’s Idle mode (automatic switch-off from a lack of movement) kept kicking in despite being turned off (yeah yeah, I should have been riding), but I expect it will be longer than the Fly6 CE.

Video recording

The video above provides real footage of Fly12 CE and Fly6 CE units, along with comparisons.

The original Fly12 was already competitive in the recording domain, offering 1080p definition at a maximum of 60fps, and it did so with reasonable colours and clarity with a wide 135-degree field of view. By comparison, the older Fly6s recorded at 720p and 30fps in a rare AVI file format with a narrower 100-degree field of view.

As mentioned above, the Fly6 CE has been upgraded to match the recording capabilities of the Fly12 and has inherited the same 135-degree lens. For those hoping to store more footage, both units can record at 1080p at 30fps, and, 720p at 60fps.

The new 6-axis image stabilisation does indeed work as claimed (at least for the Fly12) and goes a long way toward smoothing out what would otherwise be shaky footage. The feature does have a way of making an off-road rides look far tamer than reality, but on the road, it works to provide a clearer picture. Unfortunately, that image stabilisation refused to work for me on the Fly6 CE (see video above). Ben Hammond, Chief Marketing Officer at Cycliq, acknowledged that this was a known issue that was addressed by a previous firmware update, so it’s not clear why I couldn’t make use of image stabilisation with my sample, even after updating the firmware.

Compared to the second generation Fly6 that I had on hand, footage from the Fly6 CE appeared far more natural than the overly-warm tones captured by its predecessor. The wider field of view also does wonders for the new camera, grabbing license plate detail at angles well beyond what previous generations could manage. However, compared to the Fly12 CE, absolute clarity and colours are still lacking, and while it’s more than adequate for a safety camera, it can’t be considered an action camera.

The Fly12 CE, in contrast, can be considered a decent action camera. Not only does it do an impressive job capturing your field of view, it doesn’t suffer the same amount of barrel distortion as a GoPro Hero 4 Silver. Colours are good, and the Fly12 CE does a respectable job in challenging conditions, such as dappled light, capturing great detail without blowing out, unlike the GoPro. Both devices do suffer from lens flare in between shadows, though, with the Fly12 CE worse off.

All told, I was happy with the results I got off-road when using the Fly12 CE, and I wouldn’t hesitate to share it with an audience. Cycliq clearly agree with this sentiment, providing a handy save button (aka, “Did you see that?!”) for the Fly12 CE, whereas no such feature exists for the Fly6.

Both cameras were virtually useless at night, which isn’t surprising, but it may disappoint some hoping that the safety camera function was more versatile. As you can see in the recorded footage above, both cameras capture the general surroundings, but any specific details, such as license plate numbers, are often lost to overexposure by reflected light. Still, the footage may prove more useful than having none at all (see side-bar below), and you still get the benefit of the lights.

The Fly12’s rear-facing microphone is well controlled, if not lacking sensitivity. Even in a waterproof housing, the GoPro Hero 4 is far more sensitive to noise and if talking on camera, or capturing witty conversation is important, than you’ll likely be disappointed by the Fly12 CE.

The two devices differed quite significantly in their ability to record sound. The Fly12 CE’s microphone was relatively insensitive while the Fly6 CE could pick up sloshing from my water bottle (okay, you have to listen closely, but it is there, I swear). On the road, and at speed, audio from the Fly6 CE was often overwhelmed by wind noise, so it was pretty useless (and painful to listen to).

Hammond said the company is working on a firmware solution for this, saying that “balancing the profile and form factor of the device and the firmware algorithms is a challenge, however, we have tried to optimise it to pick up on any altercations once the bike is stationary (e.g. if there is an accident or confrontation).” Clearly, what is needed is some kind of smart audio collection, but until then, get used to muting the playback for any on-bike footage from the Fly6 CE.

The Other Features

Both the Fly6 CE and Fly12 feature an alarm that is controlled through the phone app. Designed to be used when ordering a latte, the alarm is enabled via Bluetooth and uses the device’s accelerometers to detect movement. If your bike is moved, the unit will start to flash and sound an annoyingly loud alarm. Assuming you and your connected phone are within the Bluetooth range (approx 15 meters), you’ll be alerted, too.

But wait, there’s more (though not a free set of steak knives). The Cycliq Fly12 CE and Fly6 CE can each be turned into very annoying alarms.

Curiously, both devices are equipped with a “flight mode”. That’s because Bluetooth is constantly running, and while it doesn’t seem to have a big impact on battery life over the course of a few days, there are aviation laws to abide by. Thus, it’s something for owners to keep in mind when travelling with these devices.

As mentioned in the introduction above, the Fly6 CE and Fly12 CE are now equipped with ANT+ connectivity, which may strike some as odd, given that there is no data to broadcast from a light/camera. However, ANT+ connectivity can be used to provide battery levels and some remote functions, such as operating the lights, just like Garmin’s lights and some models from Bontrager.

At this stage, only Garmin’s newest Edge models are compatible with the Fly6 CE and Fly12 CE, but they can be configured to turn on when the head unit is powered up while relaying information on battery levels. Right now that may seem a little gimmicky — and it is — but it’s likely that this kind of integration will become more useful with time.

I have the older versions, should I upgrade?

The New Fly6 CE is a vast improvement on previous generations. It’s enough of an upgrade that those using earlier generations of the Fly6 will be happy with their purchase. Even if it’s only for the improved light output.

The same can’t be said for the Fly12 CE. It’s certainly better than the original, but I don’t think there’s enough to justify replacing an existing unit. Yes, it’s smaller, lighter and brighter, but the original Fly12 does the most important things nearly as well.

As for those that have yet to install a safety camera on their bikes, but are thinking about it, I’m convinced the Fly6 CE and Fly12 CE are benchmark products. A set isn’t cheap, nor that lightweight, but if you compare it to a decent set of lights and quality action cameras, they are not only better value, they are better-considered products, too.

I’m so impressed with the new Fly6 CE that I’d choose to ride with one, and it’s a product I’d suggest for the masses. While it’s noticeably bigger and heavier than a rear light alone, it does much more than just keep you seen.

The same argument also works well for the front-facing Fly12 CE, but I don’t feel the need to have my rides recorded in such detail. And given that the Fly12 CE is noticeably bigger and more expensive than the Fly6 CE, I’d happily forego the extra camera angle in favour of a simpler front light.

A look at what’s included with the Fly12 CE.

A look at what’s included with the Fly6 CE.

The Fly12 CE and Fly6 CE now aesthetically match.

The Fly12 CE takes up a surprising amount of bar space.

Purely for size, here’s the Fly12 CE next to an Exposure Diablo.

For the Fly6 CE, the buttons sit on the side. One button handles the off/on and the mode toggling. The button on the other side is simply there for light brightness.

A side latch hides the Fly12 CE’s charge port and memory card slot. Such things are merely protected with a rubber cap on the Fly6 CE.

The new CE models are provided in much smaller boxes.

The Fly6 CE comes with three rubber wedges like this. They’re each designed to fit different seatpost shapes.

The Fly6 velcro strap comes with a silicon backing that grips nicely. Unfortunately it didn’t last.

The new Fly6 CE is smaller and better looking than the older generations.

The post Cycliq Fly12 CE & Fly6 CE bike cameras review: lights, camera, connectivity appeared first on CyclingTips.

Garmin’s new Edge 130 packs a generous array of useful features into its diminutive case, but does without the laundry list of more advanced ones that many riders don’t ever use. It’s also very lightweight, sports a surprisingly big screen, and commands a relatively modest sum of cash.

The Edge 130 is far from the fanciest or most expensive model in Garmin’s deep catalog of GPS cycling computers. But I’d argue that it’s not only the most important Edge Garmin has released in recent years, but quite possibly also the best one overall for most riders.

Less is more

Throughout Garmin’s long lineage of Edge GPS cycling computers, none seem to have as ardent a following as the Edge 500. First introduced in 2009, the compact model was aimed at performance-minded riders who wanted the convenience of a GPS-based computer, but one that was lightweight and had the ability to pair ANT+-compatible wireless devices such as power meters and heart rate monitors.

However, mapping functions on the Edge 500 were basically non-existent, and the monochrome LCD screen certainly didn’t provide as much visual sizzle as today’s full-color displays. Clearly, there was room for improvement.

Garmin injected an increasingly long list of functions into subsequent models, such as the Edge 510 and 520; Edge 800, 810 and 820; and the Edge 1000 and 1030. Though more feature-packed with everything from advanced navigation capabilities, to a huge list of possible data fields, smartphone connectivity, improved satellite receivers, and more, they also got much costlier, bigger, and most importantly, seemed less reliable over the long term.

The Garmin Edge 130 packs a relatively large display into its minuscule case, with up to eight pieces of data available on a maximum of 11 customizable pages.

It doesn’t take much online sleuthing to dig up plenty of accounts from aggravated Garmin users with buggy or bricked units, but somehow, the workhorse Edge 500 has somehow (mostly) managed to evade most of the major issues. It’s doubtful that Garmin has dedicated a disproportionate amount of support to this long-discontinued model, so the only logical reason left is that the Edge 500’s less-complicated firmware simply presented fewer things to go wrong.

Garmin’s model naming system would make the Edge 510 and Edge 520 (and the latest Edge 520 Plus) the intended successors to the Edge 500. However, the Edge 130 feels much more like the true descendant of that venerable workhorse.

Whereas the Edge 510, 520, and 520 Plus grew larger than the Edge 500, the Edge 130 is smaller and lighter, weighing just 33g without the mount, and measuring a tidy 41 x 63 x 16mm (the Edge 500 was 57g and measured 48 x 69 x 22mm). But despite the decrease in exterior dimensions, the LCD screen is nearly the same size at a comparatively generous 27 x 36mm, like one of those nouveau-riche McMansions built on a tiny plot of land.

A size (and screen) comparison of several popular GPS cycling computers. From left to right: the Garmin Edge 520, Wahoo Fitness ELEMNT Mini, Garmin Edge 130, Wahoo Fitness ELEMNT Bolt, and Lezyne Super GPS.

And just like the old Edge 500, the Edge 130 is operated with good old fashioned buttons instead of a touchscreen — five of them, in this case, arranged around the left, right, and lower edges of the case, and all rated to IPX7 levels of weatherproofing (basically, it’s fine to ride in the rain with this thing, but don’t go swimming with it).

Function-wise, the Edge 130 is expectedly richer than what the nearly-10-year-old Edge 500 offered, but still nowhere near as feature-packed as the Edge 1030. That unit offers a choice from 141 different data fields in addition to its advanced navigation, training, connectivity functions, plus third-party app compatibility that adds even more.

The Edge 130, on the other hand, limits the possible data field options to just 46, primarily centered around core functions related to speed, distance, time, barometer-based elevation, heart rate, and power. It won’t tell you how much time you spent seated vs. standing, your 30-second left vs. right power balance, or show your heart rate and cadence zones on a lovely full-color bar graph. However, that’s just fine since many riders don’t want or need that stuff, anyway.

Retail price is US$200 / AU$300 / £170 / €200 for the Edge 130 head unit alone. Bundled packages including a mix of speed, cadence, and heart rate sensors are also available, depending on region.

But still a lot to offer

That said, the Edge 130 is hardly a stripped-down price-point model. In addition to the usual metrics already mentioned, units paired with smartphones running the Garmin Connect app will also get live Strava segments, on-screen notifications such as calls and text messages, the ability to follow preloaded courses and routes, weather alerts, and Garmin’s nifty LiveTrack feature, which allows selected friends and family to follow your location in real time.

The Edge 130 can also be paired with Garmin Varia accessories, such as the front LED headlight and rear-facing radar unit, and most other ANT+ or Bluetooth-compatible cycling accessory like power meters and heart rate monitors.

Garmin didn’t equip the Edge 130 with a touchscreen, but the menu navigation is so straightforward and intuitive that the physical buttons work just fine. And given the more limited selection of data fields relative to more complex Edge models like the 1030, it isn’t that much of a chore to scroll through the different options on the device itself.

Users can opt to see just about as much or as little information as they’d like, with up to 11 different screens that can be customized with up to eight pieces of data each. Running elevation graphs can also be displayed, along with a digital compass, weather forecasts, and a breadcrumb-style map (again, no legitimate mapping or navigation is provided, although you get turn-by-turn directions for preloaded routes).

Some riders might be put off by Garmin’s decision to use a monochrome screen, but the fact of the matter is that a full-color display simply isn’t needed. The Edge 130’s LCD screen is gloriously crisp and legible, even in extremely bright sunlight, so all of that information is easy to read at a glance. In fact, I found the Edge 130’s screen to be sharper and easier to read than the full-color display on the Edge 520.

Likewise, no one should get too upset that the Edge 130 doesn’t have a touchscreen. The pleasantly intuitive and straightforward menu structure works very well with the physical buttons, which are also more reliable and predictable, especially when wearing full-fingered gloves. The ones situated on the front edge of the case might be difficult to access with out-front computer mounts that place the unit very close to the bar, though; it would have been better to put them on the upper edge instead.

The location for the big Garmin logo is undoubtedly chosen for visibility, but in terms of function, it might have been better to put the two buttons on the lower edge up here instead.

The fact that every operation is performed on the device itself is bound to have its proponents and critics. Wahoo Fitness uses an app-based system for its ELEMNT line of computers, for example, and it’s certainly easier in many ways to use the larger screen and richer display on your smartphone, such as when trying to configure various data screens. That said, it’s a less arduous process on the Edge 130 relative to more complicated units such as Garmin’s Edge 1030; with fewer things to choose from, you just don’t need to scroll through as many pull-down menus with tiny little buttons.

Linking to a smartphone carries its own pitfalls, too. You can’t program an ELEMNT computer at all if you don’t have a phone paired, for example, and linking those advanced connectivity features introduces a whole host of complications and potential errors that are often due to the phone, not the computer.

Regardless, the Edge 130 is highly responsive. Unlike the original Edge 500, which was compatible only with the US-based GPS satellite network, the Edge 130 works with the GLONASS and Galileo systems. Combined with predictive satellite tracking, I found the Edge 130 to regularly lock on to its position within 5-10 seconds, whereas the old Edge 500 could sometimes be frustratingly slow to “find” itself. Claimed battery life for the Edge 130 is pegged at “up to 15 hours,” and in reality, I got pretty close to that when running without any paired accessories.

Ghosts in the machine

As much as I want to believe that Garmin has rid itself of any software demons with the Edge 130, a couple of glitches I noticed make me hesitant to celebrate just yet.

Weather reports didn’t always show up the way they should, and the Garmin Connect app didn’t always detect the device without some fiddling. Strangely enough, that old Edge 500 relied on a physical cabled connection to a laptop or desktop computer for post-ride uploads, not a fancy wireless link, and it always worked just fine. Go figure. Granted, this issue may be related more to the smartphone connection and/or the app, not the Edge 130 itself, but once again, the fact that a paired phone is required for some of the more advanced features introduces more possibility for malfunctions.

It seems logical that the Edge 130’s pared-down functionality relative to more advanced Garmin models should make it more reliable. However, there was still one instance I had where the unit got confused as to where it was. I had already left Wild Horse Circle several minutes before this message presented itself.

My Edge 130 also seemed to lose track of where it was briefly during one ride, where an alert popped up telling me that a certain segment was approaching. However, I had already left the area several minutes prior, but yet the Edge 130 told me that I was getting closer. This is another instance where the hiccup could be more related to third-party software than the Edge 130 itself, but it’s a little concerning regardless.

A sign of things to come?

I am hardly a luddite when it comes to technology and bicycles, and I don’t subscribe to a less-is-more philosophy across the board. But there is a lot to be said to only having as much as you need, and not a lot more, when it comes to electronics. That seems to go double with Garmin’s Edge family of GPS cycling computers, which have certainly had more than their fair share of hiccups over the years. Every additional line of code introduces more potential for error, and few things are more frustrating than technology that doesn’t work as intended.

Garmin first showed off this simpler approach with the tiny Edge 20 and Edge 25 GPS computers that were introduced back in 2015, which provided little more than the absolute basics. Those units were arguably too pared-down, though, whereas this little Edge 130 feels just about right: not too big, not too small; not too complicated, not too simple. It’s the Goldilocks of Garmin’s range, no question.

If you’ve been faithfully holding on to your aging (and now, probably ailing) Edge 500, have faith: a proper successor has finally arrived, and hopefully it holds up as well over the long run, too. Time will tell.

Find out more about the Edge 130 at garmin.com.

The Garmin Edge 130 can tell you which direction you’re heading in, where you’ve been, and if you preload a course, where you’re going. Otherwise, though, there aren’t any proper mapping or navigation functions to be had here.

The digital compass can be very handy for trail use.

Elevation profiles are also available on the Garmin Edge 130.

On-board ANT+ and Bluetooth wireless functionality allows the Edge 130 to pair with a wide range of accessories. Shimano’s Di2 electronic transmission isn’t one of them, however.

If you so choose, you can get notifications for incoming text messages and phone calls, too.

The Edge 130’s monochrome LCD is extremely bright, crisp, and legible, even in intense sunlight.

When paired with Garmin’s rear-facing Varia Radar unit, the Edge 130 will provide audible and visual alerts for motor vehicles approaching from behind.

I like the simplicity of physical buttons relative to a touchscreen, but these two on the lower edge of the Edge 130 can be problematic as some out-front mounts can put the unit too close to the bar to access them.

The Garmin Edge 130 is impressively tiny. Here, it’s compared side-to-side with Wahoo Fitness’s ELEMNT Bolt (left).

The back of the Garmin Edge 130 features a micro-USB port, Garmin’s ubiquitous quarter-turn mount interface, and a small loop at the lower edge where a security lanyard can be attached if desired. Tucked safely in the center of the quarter-turn interface is the intake for the barometric altimeter.

The new Garmin Edge 130 (left) is substantially smaller and lighter than the old Edge 500 (right), but its screen is nearly as large (and far more crisp).

The post Garmin Edge 130 review: The spiritual successor to the Edge 500 appeared first on CyclingTips.

It’s that time of year again: The world’s biggest bike race is just around the corner, as is Eurobike, the world’s largest bicycle trade show. Bike launch season is upon us, too, but the UCI have provided a bit of a sneak preview of what’s to come, courtesy of their updated list of approved frames.

With the newly updated UCI list in hand, some keen eyes, and just a pinch of speculation thrown in, here’s a list of new road bikes you can likely expect for 2019.

Cannondale SystemSix

With team riders spotted racing on disc-equipped Cannondale prototypes at Abu Dhabi earlier in the year, the return of the SystemSix as an aero road bike is hardly speculative. Interestingly, the UCI list doesn’t specify the SystemSix as a disc-brake or rim-brake bike, which either means there’s a rim-brake version set to surprise, or the bike will be released with just spinning rotors.

Given Cannondale’s fairly consistent pre-Tour release timing, we’re betting an official release of the SystemSix and its truncated tubes will come early July.

Giant Propel Rim

Released last year, Giant’s aero road platform is currently only available with disc brakes. Is that about to change?

It was about 10 months ago that Giant released the Propel Disc, and back then, global marketing manager Andrew Juskaitis hinted that only offering the Propel with disc brakes was a risk. Many Giant distributors around the globe were pushing for a rim-brake version, and at the time, sales figures for the TCR model were still in favour of the rim-brake versions, too.

While the brake configuration of the Cannondale SystemSix isn’t called out on the UCI list, rim brakes are specified for both the 2019 Giant Propel Advanced and Propel Advanced Pro. However, there is no mention of a rim-brake Propel Advanced SL. Will we see pros riding one of the mid-range framesets instead, or is there something else still to come? Or will the pros remain on the disc version when they want aero benefits? All of those questions will likely be answered after the Tour.

Giant Defy Disc

Giant’s dedicated endurance road platform, the Defy, was arguably the industry’s first major bike range to force the use of disc brakes. With the current generation tipping into its fourth year of use, the Defy is ready for an update to bring it inline with more recently revamped competitors such as the Cannondale Synapse, Trek Domane, and Specialized Roubaix.

Trends in endurance bikes should reveal where the new Defy will head. Expect clearance for 30c+ tyres, disc brakes, and frame features designed for compliance. Giant are not shy about using their own components so it’s quite possible we’ll see a comfort-orientated handlebar setup, wider tubeless tyres, and a new wheelset accompany the bike.

Liv Envie Disc

Giant’s sister company, Liv, looks set to bring out a women’s-specific version of the Propel Disc. Where the Liv Langma is a lightweight all-rounder, the Envie is one for the sprinters, triathletes, and casual Ironman competitors. In general Liv fashion, we can expect to see some geometry and carbon lay-up tweaks compared to the Propel Disc, but would be surprised if the frame profiles are dramatically changed.

Trek Madone Disc

Working on a three year product lifecycle, the Madone is due for an update (even if it doesn’t need one in order to remain competitive).

This one is speculation (and this post on WeightWeenies raises the rumour stakes), but with the current Madone now its third year, and every other road bike in the American company’s range now available in disc option, how could this not be true?

It’s quite likely we’ll see the aero road focused Madone range updated in the way the Emonda was last year, with a new rim-brake version released alongside a wholly new disc option. The current Madone is already one of the better bikes in the aero road space, and so Trek may only need to make minor refinements to ensure its competitive position. It seems likely Trek will stick with its IsoSpeed pivoting seat tube comfort technology, and Kammtail truncated tube shapes, but it’ll be interesting to see what else the innovative company introduce here.

Focus Izalco Disc

It looks like a third generation of the Izalco is on the way. So far, only a disc version has graced the UCI-approved list, but it would be surprising if that’s all we see from the German company.

The Izalco is a lightweight all-rounder, and given Focus’ lack of an aero road bike in the range, it’s possible we’ll see some aero tube profiling introduced while keeping weight, stiffness, and ride quality intact. Adding to this possibility is that Focus share a parent company with Cervélo (PON Holdings), and to date, not a whole lot of design collaboration has been seen.

Specialized Allez Sprint Disc

We suspect a few people will be excited about a disc-equipped Allez Sprint. We are.

As a fan of the Allez Sprint alloy bike, our own James Huang was pretty excited to hear about this one. It seems the bike used by the US Pro Continental Hagens-Berman Axeon cycling team is soon to get a disc variant.

As far as alloy bikes go, there’s not a lot out there competing directly with the aero-profiled Allez Sprint, and given this, I’m speculating that the disc version will simply be a new fork and rear end for the existing platform. It’ll otherwise look quite familiar, which is hardly a bad thing.

Specialized Venge Disc

New Specialized Venge SW, so much better looking! #specialized #iamspecialized #sworks #venge #spyshot #prototype #aeroiseverything

A post shared by Mikey VK (@mikey.vk) on Jun 2, 2018 at 2:46pm PDT

This hasn’t reached the updated UCI list, but it’s clear both Bora–Hansgrohe and Quick-Step Floors have their hands on a new disc-equipped aero road bike. Looking at the photos, it seems Specialized has gone with truncated aero tube shapes, likely to improve the bike’s stiffness. The photos don’t reveal a huge amount, but clearly the existing Venge ViAS Disc’s sculpted downtube, which hugs the front wheel, is replaced in favour of a more traditional straight tube.

BMC Timemachine Road

It’s been a long time since BMC updated their aero road platform, and in fact, the Timemachine Road (TMR) is currently missing from the Swiss bike company’s range. The WorldTour team consistently picks the well-rounded Teammachine for races, and a modern aero road bike is clearly absent.

As a progressive bike company, it wouldn’t be too surprising if they took the path of Giant and went disc-only at launch. BMC is another company that often releases new bikes prior to the Tour de France, so watch this space.

Colnago C64 Disc

Announced back in February, Colnago is set to bring out a disc version of its newly released C64 lugged carbon bike. I’ve included it on the list because the bike isn’t yet on shop floors and it’s certainly one we’re keen to throw a leg over for review.

Fuji Transonic

First announced in 2014, the Fuji Transonic aero road bike looks set for an update.

According to the UCI-approved list, Fuji is set to release new versions of the well-rounded Transonic aero road bike platform. The UCI list shows both rim-brake and disc-brake options, sticking with the trend of most brands offering both.

The aero road bike market has progressed plenty since the existing Transonic’s 2014 introduction. Fuji’s parent company also owns Oval components, so it seems likely the new version will feature an integrated cockpit among other changes.

Lapierre Xelius SL 2

Lapierre’s all-rounder road bike, the Xelius SL, looks set to receive a makeover. Given the bike’s general classification purpose, we can likely expect the new model to be lighter, stiffer, and more compliant than before. Perhaps it’ll even borrow some aero trickery from the Aircode SL. However, I suspect the somewhat signature bypass seatstays, which connect directly to the top tube, will remain.

Orbea Orca Aero Disc

Orbea’s new aero road bike will soon get a disc-equipped sibling.

It was 10 months ago that Orbea released the new Orca Aero road bike, and it appears a disc-equipped version is on the way to accompany it. Given the young age of the rim-brake bike, it’s more than likely the Spanish company will merely change the rear end of the frame and produce a new fork in order to create the Orca Aero Disc.

Pinarello Dogma K10S rim brake

Featuring one centimeter of electronically controlled suspension at the top of the seatstays, Pinarello’s recently released Dogma K10S Disk is a bike designed for the cobbles, which doubles as a performance-oriented endurance platform. While it’s the disc version of the bike that was officially released, Sky’s Geraint Thomas, among other team riders, was seen on a rim-brake version of this during the Classics, and that bike is now on the UCI-approved list.

Do any of these new road bikes pique your interest? What would you like to see in 2019?

The post Road bikes to expect in 2019: Speculation on the updated UCI approved list appeared first on CyclingTips.

When road disc bikes were first unveiled, Shimano was reasonably quick to bring suitable brakes and wheels to market, but none could be counted as high-end products. That all changed when Shimano unveiled the new Dura-Ace R9100 series for 2017 that included its vision for a high-end disc brake groupset.

The new ensemble of Dura-Ace components included a range of road disc wheels with a fresh pair of carbon rim profiles — C40 and C60 — that was studiously developed to suit tubulars and tubeless clinchers. In this review, Australian tech editor Matt Wikstrom takes a close look at what the new road disc wheels have to offer, paying particular attention to the mid-profile C40 for tubeless clinchers.

Shimano’s recent overhaul of its Dura-Ace components for 2017 was extensive, to say the least, with the company producing four discrete ensembles incorporating both mechanical and electronic transmissions as well as rim and disc brakes. The new R9100 collection also included a range of new wheelsets, and most notably, the company’s first all-carbon road clinchers. There was a catch, though: the new all-carbon clinchers were disc-only while the rim brake versions would continue with carbon-laminated aluminium rims.

Given the problems that rim brakes can create for carbon clinchers, Shimano’s steadfast devotion to carbon-laminated rims is understandable. If nothing else, the scale of Shimano’s production means that a tiny safety issue in terms of percentages would still have an impact on a significant number of cyclists and mar its reputation.

By contrast, Dura-Ace racing tubulars have featured all-carbon rims for several years, so it’s clear that Shimano is not wholly cautious with the material. Instead, the company’s approach appears carefully considered, so it’s really not surprising to see Shimano’s first all-carbon clincher rims being developed for disc-equipped bikes.

As reported in our initial look at the R9100 Dura-Ace range, there are four road disc wheelsets on offer, one pair to suit tubular tyres, and another pair to suit tubeless clinchers. All make use of the same hubs and spokes with a choice of two rim profiles for each tyre system, C40 and C60, which are 37mm and 60mm tall, respectively.

C40-TL: the most versatile choice

For the majority of riders, the tubeless-ready C40-TL will be the most alluring option in Shimano’s new range of Dura-Ace road disc wheels (all of which wear the same R9170 catalogue number). After all, tubular tyres are simply too inconvenient to use on a daily basis, and a mid-profile rim like the C40 is well suited to year-round use because it won’t be troubled by crosswinds like the taller C60 profile.

As mentioned above, all R9170 wheels feature the same hubs, straight-pull spokes, and external alloy nipples. Spoke counts and lacing patterns are also identical, and like all of Shimano’s wheels, they are manufactured in the company’s Malaysian facility. The tubular wheelsets are significantly lighter than the tubeless models, though: the C40-TU (tubular) is over 200g lighter than the C40-TL, while the C60-TU is 140g lighter than the C60-TL.

There is one other difference between R9170 tubeless and tubular rims, and that is the external width of each rim. The tubeless rim measures 24mm wide while the tubular is 28mm. Nevertheless, both rims share the same D2 rim profile that was refined with the help of wind tunnel testing. Shimano is not making any of this data public, so for those that need hard data, they will have to wait until independent tests are published.

The C40-TL and C60-TL are tubeless ready and arrive with suitable tape and valves installed.

Be that as it may, I suspect that the tubular rims are a little more aerodynamic than the tubeless equivalents due to a sleeker rim/tyre interface. And while the C40 may offer some reduction in drag, it won’t be in the same realm as the C60. If Shimano has done its homework, then the C60 should achieve the same performance (or better) than the C75 it replaces while offering the rider some respite from crosswinds.

Shimano has long championed the value of wheel systems, where the design of each component is diligently engineered to complement the others, and the result is a wheel that is greater than the sum of its parts. The downside of this approach is that it results in proprietary parts that cannot be replaced at short notice, however Shimano does make a range of spares for its wheels, includes hub parts and spokes.

The primary goal of developing these wheel systems is to create a reliable and safe product. Interestingly, there is no weight limit for any of the R9170 range, which provides some measure of the confidence Shimano has in the strength and durability of these wheels.

Halving the number of spokes on the non-drive-side of the rear wheel means more spoke tension is required, which is a better match for the high tension on the drive-side spokes.

One key aspect of this strategy is to address the imbalance in spoke tension for the rear wheel, which is always higher on the drive-side. This is where Shimano’s OptBal spoke system comes into play, which is simply a re-badged version of triplet spoke lacing (just like Fulcrum’s 2:1 spoke ratio and Campagnolo’s G3 lacing pattern). By using half as many spokes (eight) on the non-drive-side of the wheel, and employing a radial lacing pattern (which keeps the length of the spokes as short as possible), more spoke tension is required to match the drive-side spokes.

In the case of the C40-TL (and the rest of the R9170 wheel range), this spoke lacing strategy is complemented with carefully refined hub geometry that attends to the spoke tension while providing robust bracing angles for lateral stiffness. I found that the tension on the non-drive-side spokes of the C40-TL rear wheel sent for review was virtually identical to the drive-side of the wheel, which is something that is not normally seen for any rear wheel with an asymmetrical hub. Indeed, it trumps Campagnolo’s and Fulcrum’s best efforts, where non-drive-side tension is ~70% of the drive-side, and promises to further reduce spoke fatigue.

The OptBal system is not applied to the front wheel even though it also has an asymmetrical hub (the left hub flange is offset by the disc rotor). Instead, a conventional two-cross lacing pattern is used for the 24 spokes in the wheel, with the result that spoke tension on the right side of the wheel was two-thirds that of the left side. While this may seem like an oversight, I suspect that the extra forces associated with front-end braking and the disc brake played a role in this decision.

Like the rear wheel, 24 spokes are used to build the front wheel, but that number is evenly split, so 12 spokes are used on each side of the wheel.

Out of the box

The R9170 C40-TL wheelset sent for review by Shimano Australia weighed 1,566g (front, 705g; rear, 861g) with rim tape. Out of the box, the rims were ready for tubeless tyres with tubeless valves installed.

In the first instance, I was able to install a set of standard clinchers (28c Vittoria Rubino Pro) with inner tubes without any difficulty. The tyres were an easy fit without levers, and they were quick to seat once inflated. Installing a set of tubeless tyres (25c Schwalbe Pro One) was a little more difficult, but that’s the nature of the tubeless beast. With an air compressor on hand, the tyres were quick to inflate and seat with a few loud pops. After that, they stayed inflated and I was able to ignore the tyres.

The C40-TL and C60-TL rims have a 17mm rim bed, which has become the industry norm for modern rims. It’s a little wider than rims used to be, and any road tyre will puff up a little wider than usual (for example, a 25c Schwalbe Pro One measured 26.5mm at 70psi). With that said, other brands are producing rims with wider beds (19mm or greater) for road/all-road use, so Shimano is far from the cutting edge with its tubeless rims.

Shimano recommends tyre sizes of 23-32c for the C40-TL (and C60-TL), which will suit most road and all-road bikes in use today. However, the 24mm external width of the tubeless rims places a limit on the tyre size that can be used without interfering with the aerodynamics of the wheels. This is not a major restriction, but I can’t see any sense in a buyer opting for the aerodynamic appeal of these wheels and then fitting 32c tyres for extra comfort/traction.

The C40-TL hubs accommodate 12mm diameter thru-axles with 100mm and 142mm spacing for the front and rear, respectively. Both have become the default specification for road disc bikes, but it’s worth noting that it is not possible to convert the hubs to other sizes, such as a 15mm thru-axle for the front, or standard quick-release axles.

Both hubs roll on conventional cup-and-cone bearings with stainless steel balls. In a market dominated by hubsets with cartridge bearings, this may seem like a throwback to an earlier era, but Shimano (like Campagnolo/Fulcrum), believes in the traditional design. If nothing else, it is far easier to service and adjust the bearings; all that is required is a few oversized cone spanners.

Aside from accommodating a 12mm diameter thru-axle, the front hub is a conventional cup-and-cone design.

A pair of 17mm cone spanners is required to remove the lock nut.

Once the adjusting cone has been removed, the axle slides out. Bearing shields on each side of the hub will keep the bearings in place.

The bearing shield is easy to pry off with a flat screwdriver.

The ball bearings sit in a retainer that makes it easier to handle them.

Wipe out the old grease, smear on some new stuff, and the hub is ready for re-assembly.

Front axle assembly: note that one cone is fixed, which simplifies installation and adjustment.

Center Lock mount for the disc rotor and straight-pull spokes.

A two-cross lacing pattern is used for both sides of the wheel.

The assembly of the rear hub is largely the same as the front, however a combination of 17mm and 19mm cone spanners is required to undo the lock nut.

The lock nut is easy to unwind…

… as is the adjusting cone.

Once the axle has been removed, the bearing shield can be pried off.

The non-drive-side bearings are held in a retainer.

If the inner race is ever damaged, it can’t be replaced.

The drive-side bearings are not held in a retainer, so it’s more difficult to remove them and clean up this part of the hub.

The rear axle assembly is just as simple as the front.

The rear wheel makes use of straight-pull spokes with a three-cross lacing pattern on the drive-side…

… versus radial lacing for the non-drive-side spokes. Note also the difference in spoke count.

The freehub body also continues with Shimano’s sealed design, which cannot be serviced, only replaced once the internals become contaminated or degrade. The body itself is made from titanium, which will resist sprocket-bite, and is only available to suit Shimano/SRAM cassettes (up to and including 11-speed).

Installing the disc rotors was quick and easy thanks to Shimano’s Center Lock design. For the uninitiated, any Center Lock rotor simply slides onto a splined core and is held in place with threaded lockring that resembles a cassette lockring (it also requires the same splined tool as Shimano’s cassette lockring).

I’ve already mentioned that the C40-TL is delivered with tubeless rim tape installed, but in the event of a broken spoke, owners will have to contend with a unique requirement. That’s because the rim bed is not dotted with holes for the spoke nipples, but larger rectangular openings, which creates a challenge for sealing the rim for tubeless use. For this reason, Shimano created a special “stainless steel tape”, and panels of the stuff are used to cover each opening. These adhesive panels are single-use items, so owners will need to have a replacement on hand should they ever need to replace a spoke or nipple.

With a combination of all-carbon rims, high-end hubs, and the Dura-Ace label, the R9170 C40-TL promises to be an expensive wheelset, and it is: AU$2,400/US$2,000/£2,000/€2,200. However, it’s not as expensive as some brands that offer many of the same features, but it won’t catch the eye of bargain hunters, who will be more impressed with cheaper offerings (such as the Prime RP-38 road disc wheelset).

After the ride

I had a fuss-free experience from the moment I pulled the C40-TL out of the box, and while the wheels never managed to dazzle me, they lived up to expectations for a mid-profile carbon wheelset.

To start with, they were versatile performers. They were light enough to take into the hills and I could attack valley descents without fear that a sudden crosswind would blow me off-course. That’s not to say that the front wheel was completely untroubled by crosswinds, but it remained quite predictable in windy conditions.

The C40-TL was reasonably responsive, too. As a sub-1,600g wheelset, they were light enough to spin up pretty quickly while offering a certain amount of agility, but they couldn’t match the performance of a lighter wheelset with low-profile carbon rims (e.g. the Hunt 30Carbon Aero Disc). For those riders looking to trade up from a heavier stock alloy wheelset, I expect the C40-TL will impress, which is what I found when I fitted them to Trek’s Emonda SL 6 Disc.

The ride quality of the C40-TL was unremarkable, which is to say they weren’t overly stiff in any regard. The wheels never felt harsh when hopping curbs and they never created any unnecessary vibrations on uneven surfaces. When it came to sprinting out of the saddle, they felt sure and robust under load instead of flimsy and uncertain. Of course, these impressions are subject to all sorts of caveats, including tyre size and pressure along with the stiffness of the bike, but after experimenting with a couple of different tyre sizes and bikes, I can say I was never disappointed by these wheels.

The wheels always rolled nicely, but if the 37mm rim profile helped my efficiency, then it was too small to notice. In this regard, the best any rider can hope for is a nuance. What I find is more significant is that the sight of a taller rim often helps me find a more aggressive frame of mind for my cycling, and I will go faster, but only because I’m inspired to drive the bike harder. As such, I don’t expect the C40-TL will overhaul the capabilities of any buyer, but they will probably have a good time using them.

After putting the C40-TL to use for a month, it was that enjoyment that proved to be the most consistent feature of this wheelset: a versatile pair of wheels that was easy to use and always a pleasure to ride. The rich gloss finish always looked classy, too, and I can imagine that having spent the money, I’d feel quite pleased with my purchase.

Over the longer term, though, I expect the C40-TL will really start to shine thanks to Shimano’s considered approach, the robust build, and the balance of spoke tension for the rear wheel. Strictly speaking, these are all aspects that remain unverified, however the potential is there. And without brake pads constantly scrubbing away at the sidewalls, the only part of these wheels that will suffer wear and tear are the spokes (provided the hubs are serviced at regular intervals).

Needless to say, the wheels did not come out of true during the course of the review period, neither hub developed any play, and there were no issues with tubeless tyres leaking air. As for the sound of the freehub, it was as quiet as any other Shimano freehub, generating a gentle click that often went unnoticed.

Summary and final thoughts

In the past, I’ve often described the rims on a road bike as a consumable product because it was inevitable that they would have to be replaced as the brake track was rubbed away with use. The introduction of disc brakes changes all that, and while a crash can still ruin a wheel, road disc wheelsets should enjoy a significantly longer service life than their rim brake equivalents.

As such, I find it much easier to justify the extra expense of a high-end carbon wheelset like the C40-TL. That this wheelset ticks a lot of boxes — versatile performer, classy presentation, easy to service hubs, reasonably light and responsive, tubeless-ready, and highly enjoyable — adds to its appeal, and the asking price is not too bad, either. I would prefer wider rims, though, and have a feeling that 17mm rim beds will soon become outdated as wider versions become more widespread.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The post Shimano Dura-Ace R9170 C40-TL tubeless road disc wheelset review appeared first on CyclingTips.

In this edition of Bikes of the Bunch, Tim Webber tells us about his new custom Gellie steel road bike that was built with S&S couplings to make it easier to travel with.

Over the last few years, I’d been regularly taking one of my bikes with me when travelling, both on family holidays and riding-specific trips. Although not impossible, fitting a big bike bag in rental cars, cabs, or on trains was always a bit of a hassle, particularly when travelling with my wife and two kids, so I started exploring the alternatives.

I researched a number of collapsible travel frames made out of different materials (carbon, titanium, and steel) from off-the-shelf brands and custom frame builders. I already had a couple of carbon and titanium bikes, so I decided to try a steel frame (if I could get it light enough). All my existing frames had been off-the-shelf so I did some research on local builders, and that was how I discovered Ewen Gellie and the work he does.

Ewen is based on the outskirts of Melbourne and is a one-man-band custom frame maker (although craftsman might be a more apt description). He has a wealth of experience from racing MTB (he was the Australian downhill champion in 1988 and 1991) while his technical skills come from working as a mechanical engineer in the automotive industry for a number of years.

I first contacted Ewen towards the end of May 2017 and I visited his workshop in early June to place the order. We talked through all the specifics of what I wanted after Ewen asked what sort of riding I’d be doing with it, how much I weighed, how much weight I might ever carry on the bike, and whether there were any particular handling characteristics I was after.

I was basically after a bike I could travel with, that would be very comfortable on really long rides, that wasn’t too heavy so I could climb with it, and really stable for long descents. To help with the fit, I supplied the results of a recent bike fit from a local cycling physio and showed Ewen two of my current bikes.

From this, Ewen put together a design based on butted Columbus Life steel tubing with S&S couplings for the top and down tubes. S&S Machine has been making these couplings since 1993; when installed and tightened, they’re stronger than the tubing it replaces, so they have no impact on performance other than adding ~230g.

Ewen created a schematic demonstrating how the frame would fit in a case just large enough for the wheels without the need to remove the front fork. I’d already decided I’d run a Shimano Di2 groupset to ease the disassembly and reassembly of the bike, so Ewen would create internal routing for the wires and position the junction box near the down tube coupling for easy disconnection.

With the design all locked down, my frame went into the queue to be built. There were a couple of frames ahead of mine, so Ewen said it would be a couple of months until he’d be able to start on my bike. I was in no rush, so I went about sourcing parts in the meantime.

I hadn’t chosen a colour for the bike yet, so I figured I’d stick with basic black for the most part. I already had a Dura-Ace R9000 Di2 groupset sourced at a runout price when R9100 was introduced. The Enve Road 2.0 fork was chosen to fit a 28mm tyre, the Pro Vibe seatpost had Di2 battery integration, and I settled on a Pro PLT aluminium stem because it has front-facing bolts that are easily accessible. For the handlebar, I chose a Deda Elementi Superleggera on the basis of price and external cable routing, while I know from experience that a Selle Italia SLR Flow saddle fits my undercarriage.

Purists may be shocked to see a pair of Campagnolo wheels on a Shimano-equipped bike, but after I had a pair of Shamal Ultra C17 wheels on one of my other bikes, I decided to stick with them for the new bike. They are very reliable without being too heavy to ride up some decent cols, plus they have a sparse spoke density that makes them a little easier to pack in my travel case.

Finally, I wanted to keep the bike as clean as possible, so I sourced a Fouriers Di2 junction box holder that attaches to the steerer tube so that I could do away with the band that goes around the stem.

Build Details

Frame: Gellie custom steel with S&S couplers
Fork: Enve Road 2.0
Headset: Chris King
Stem: Pro PLT
Handlebars: Deda Superleggera
Groupset: Shimano Dura-Ace R9000 Di2 with 4iiii power meter
Wheels: Campagnolo Shamal Ultra C17
Tyres: Continental GP4000s
Seatpost: Pro Vibe
Saddle: Selle Italia SLR Flow
Pedals: Shimano Dura-Ace
Bar tape: Deda

I’d thrown around a number of colours in my mind since first ordering the bike, but nothing seemed quite right. Then one day, I was walking down my street and noticed a nice looking “velocity orange” Toyota 86, which I thought would suit the bike quite well. I emailed Ewen with the colour and he said he could source it, no problem, so I settled on it, but I needed a second colour for the frame’s two-tone scheme.

I thought a metallic grey might offset the S&S couplers nicely, but I wasn’t sure, so Ewen first mocked up a couple of versions in software, then proceeded to paint up a couple of tubes to check the look. This is the sort of service you get from using a craftsman who really cares about his work, and it proved that black was a better choice.

A couple of issues delayed my build by a bit, so Ewen didn’t get started on the frame until November. I received a number of progress photos during the process, and because I was doing quite a bit of travelling in December, I asked Ewen to build the bike for me.

The bike was ready a week before Christmas, but Ewen wanted to be able to “take a couple of photos” before I picked it up, so we agreed to meet Christmas Eve. Little did I realise that “a couple of photos” was a professional photo shoot by photographer Evan Jeffery. The day before I was due to pick it up, Evan posted on Instagram one of the photos of the bike and my jaw almost dropped off. I couldn’t really believe that it was my bike.

I’d love to say that it’s exactly what I had in my mind when I selected the frame-builder, the colours and the components. I’d like to say I knew silver-highlighted components from the 9000 groupset would complement the S&S couplers beautifully, and that I knew that some black on the underbelly of the frame would blend in perfectly with the saddle, tyres, and bar tape. I’d like to say all that, but I’d be lying.

The truth is that I was actually aiming for a bike that was easy to travel with, reliable, and looked respectable. The choice of components was dictated more by function than form. Luckily, it all seemed to come together, so if it wasn’t by design, then I’ll have to claim it was my intuition!

Needless to say, I’m very happy with the outcome. The bike comes apart and packs down into a box 26in x 26in x 10in (66cm x 66cm x 25cm), which is just large enough to fit a regular wheel (with the tyre deflated). The only problem with having such a nice paint job on a travel bike is that I’m paranoid I’ll scratch or damage it. I’ve only done one trip with it so far, and it took a bit to work out the right packing order, but it certainly fits in nice and snug. Once it’s in, it’s very secure and protected; with support struts inserted I can stand on the case without it deforming at all.

Functionally speaking, the new bike rides well and feels the smoothest compared to my carbon and titanium bikes. It’s not too dissimilar to titanium, but it’s definitely not as stiff and firm as my carbon bikes. I’m only a B-grade level rider, so I’m probably not as demanding on my bikes as some, but I don’t really notice a significant loss in terms of power transfer or responsiveness. I don’t feel like I’m compromising anything when riding it and would quite happily spend a full day in the saddle on it.

This is the second Gellie custom travel bike we’ve covered in Bikes of the Bunch. The first was seen back in 2012.

The post Bikes of the Bunch: Gellie custom travel bike appeared first on CyclingTips.

Allied Cycle Works is not your average bicycle company. The brainchild of several industry veterans, Allied doesn’t design and engineer its carbon-fiber frame and forks in-house only to then contract manufacturing overseas. Instead, the entire process is performed under the same roof in Little Rock, Arkansas. This compact supply chain offers a number of logistical benefits, and also helps Allied make some fantastic bikes in a surprisingly short timeline. Case in point: the Alfa Allroad model reviewed here, which went from concept to production in less than 18 months, and yet can still go toe-to-toe with the bigger brands in terms of both price and performance. It’s not a custom bike in the traditional sense, but it’s certainly not cookie-cutter, either — and it’s absolutely fantastic to ride.

Doing things differently

Tony Karklins was always troubled by the way mainstream companies traditionally went about making carbon-fiber bicycle frames when he was managing director at Orbea USA. Although nearly all of the design and engineering work could be done fairly quickly, and the information shared readily, it took ages to see the concepts turned into physical samples because they were being made so far away. Simple revisions could also take weeks or months to execute depending on production cycles — a painfully long wait when each season was so short.

Karklins had a vision of doing everything under a single roof, and in the United States. But there are reasons nearly every company contracts its manufacturing overseas, especially when it comes to carbon. Carbon-fiber frame production is extremely labor-intensive, and American labor has been historically expensive as compared to what was available in Asia.

While many all-road bikes make a fair number of compromises to provide extra versatility, the Allied Alfa Allroad feels like it’s given up little in the transition from its roots as a pure road machine. That said, the ride quality may be firmer than some might prefer.

Times have changed, though, and as China and Taiwan have advanced economically, so have wages. On paper, it’s still cheaper to manufacture frames in Asia, but the advantage is steadily eroding, and for some, the logistical challenges of separating R&D and manufacturing by thousands of kilometers is becoming less palatable.

Even so, building a new American frame manufacturing company from the ground up is no easy (or inexpensive) task, but one company’s demise proved to be Karklins’ phoenix rising from the ashes. Guru Cycles was a small Canadian custom frame builder, offering some of the most highly sought-after machines in a variety of materials, and across multiple disciplines. But by early 2016, the company had taken on far too much water to stay solvent, and not long after shutting its doors for good, all of Guru’s assets were sent to the auction block.

Karklins saw an opportunity.

And so he packed an overnight bag and flew north with a few investors to try his luck. As it turned out, Karklins was the only person to bid on the entire lot, including all of the milling machines, the remaining frame parts and tubing, and Guru’s massive paint booth. Needless to say, the stay ended up being a bit longer than originally anticipated.

Fun fact: The period following “Made Here” denotes the geographic location of Little Rock, Arkansas, where Allied Cycle Works builds the Alfa Allroad frame and fork.

Karklins didn’t even know the full scope of what he’d acquired until six semi trucks hauling full-sized shipping containers showed up at his door in Little Rock.

The stars further aligned in that two high-level engineers from Specialized, Sam Pickman and Chris Meertens, also happened to be fostering the same dream as Karklins, and were just about to set after it on their own when they heard about what had happened at the Guru auction. Pickman and Meertens were mentally prepared for the rigors of going at it alone, but now they didn’t have to.

Also joining the team on the engineering side was long-time Guru employee and carbon-fiber fabrication specialist Olivier Lavigeuer.

Classy.

Jim and Sarah Cunningham, who founded CyclArt in 1976, were brought on to handle paint and finish work. Karklins hired a small group of skilled labor from the surrounding area to handle tasks such as carbon fiber lay-up, bonding, testing, and assembly. Almost by happenstance, Karklins’ dream of producing carbon bikes in the United States was becoming a reality, and HIA Velo (Handmade in America) was born.

Two bikes in one

HIA Velo debuted the Alfa carbon road bike in March 2017 under the catchier-sounding Allied Cycle Works brand name, barely a year after the trucks unloaded in Little Rock. It offered traditional geometry and aesthetics, clearance for 28mm tires (or 30mm tires in the disc-brake version) and an emphasis on overall ride quality and long-term durability instead of ultra-low weight and cutting-edge aerodynamics.

Four months later was the debut of the mixed-surface Alfa Allroad review here, equipped with (very) slightly relaxed handling and a disc-only format with room for 38mm tires, but still sporting the same traditional look and feel. It’s not particularly flashy, but then again, it’s not really supposed to be.

The top tube is nearly level on the Allied Alfa Allroad, which lends a more classic look to the bike’s profile. Buyers who opt for the taller front end get the same top tube, but with almost 20mm of extra stack depending on the size.

Allied’s unique way of doing business was instrumental in bringing the Alfa and Alfa Allroad to market in such a short period of time. Most of the carbon lay-up and tube shape revisions were designed and tested on the computer before a single physical sample was produced. From there, Pickman’s team could make additional test samples in a matter of hours or days instead of weeks and months, and also test them in-house in a similarly contracted time frame. There may have been a lot of midnight oil burned during this development period, but even just being able to do so was a relative luxury; usually, engineers send updated drawings to Asia, and then wait, and wait, and wait.

Furthering helping matters is how closely the Alfa and Alfa Allroad are related to each other; they actually share identical main triangles (save for a small modification where the chainstays are joined). Each bike gets its own seatstays and chainstays, along with its own dedicated fork (Allied produces the carbon forks in-house, which is more rare in the industry than it is for frames). Up front, interchangeable molds allow for two head tube heights per size on both frame models.

On paper, the Alfa Allroad frameset might not blow anyone away. Claimed weight isn’t freakishly low at 920g for a raw 56cm frame, and Allied doesn’t make any bold claims about stiffness, compliance, or aerodynamics. The tubes are nominally round with fairly subtle shaping throughout, the wedge-type internal binder secures a conventional 27.2mm-diameter seatpost, and down below is an aluminum insert that accepts a good old fashioned English threaded bottom bracket.

The chainstays may appear a little small, but they’re actually quite bulbous. Note the size of the Campagnolo carbon crankarm for comparison.

Up front, the integrated headset envelops a tapered 1 1/8-to-1 1/4in steerer tube, there are 12mm thru-axles and flat-mount disc brake interfaces at both ends, and the internal cable routing can be configured for mechanical or electronic drivetrains, with just a bit of flair coming from the swappable eagle-shaped aluminum plate that covers the entry point on the top of the down tube.

As if the classic proportions weren’t enough of a hint already that Allied was going more for timeless, long-term performance here, three key areas of the frame are reinforced with Innegra S fibers. Featured at the seatstays, forward section of the top tube, and the fork crown and steerer base, these “high-modulus polypropylene” fibers are said to greatly improve the impact resistance of the tubes to which they’re applied, and also help hold everything together in the event that a crash is so destructive that the tube actually breaks.

Built to last: One emerging bike brand’s quest for more durable carbon fiber

Furthering the classic intent is the overall frame geometry. Allied easily could have jumped on the gravel bike bandwagon with an emphasis on stability, huge tire clearances, 700c/650b wheel-and-tire interchangeability, and a taller front end. But instead, the Alfa Allroad is more of a rally car than a SUV, emphasizing quickness and sportiness more than outright capability. Gimmicky add-ons are nowhere to be found, nor is there a hint of aerodynamic consideration given to the Alfa Allroad’s shape.

“In the Allroad, we really wanted to make a road bike with unsurpassed versatility that excelled in on-road performance, but could seamlessly transition and give up very little to purpose-built gravel bikes,” explained Pickman. “While the fantasy of going on three-day gravel adventures is incredibly appealing, the reality is that most people have to squeeze in their rides. The Allroad allows you to ride to trailheads, rip around in some dirt, then pop back out on the road and race home.”

“The weight and stiffness give a great all-around ride that focuses on really great handling, especially on the road,” Pickman continued. “That said, we are certainly not opposed to lighter weight as long as it doesn’t sacrifice durability and ride quality. Aero is a tough one. In my opinion, if you want to get meaningful benefit from aero, you have to sacrifice ride quality quite a bit. I have yet to ride an aero bike that I really enjoyed. I see the need for aero bikes and we are in no way opposed to them, but as our first offering, it felt important for us to go to market with a bike that we truly loved riding, and that bike is without a doubt the Alfa. When we do come to market with an aero bike, it will have to meet our high standard of ride quality, because what’s the point if the bike isn’t fun to ride?”

Apart from the seat cluster, the design of the Allied Alfa Allroad is all smooth lines and graceful transitions.

Allied offers the Alfa Allroad in six sizes, from 49 to 61cm, each with optional extended head tubes that raise the stack height by about 15-20mm, depending on size. Chainstay lengths are 420mm across the board, but bottom bracket drop and head tube angle vary according to size, from 71.6 to 67.6mm, and 72 to 73.8°. A longish 48mm fork rake on the Alfa Allroad yields trail figures between 61.5 and 50.1mm, for a responsive front-end feel across the board.

One of the reasons Guru shut down was its immense range of customization, which, according to Karklins, simply wasn’t scalable. As a result, Allied only offers custom geometry on the the Echo, a tube-to-tube carbon road frame that was originally intended to be Guru’s new Photon RX. That isn’t possible with the modular monocoque construction of the Alfa and Alfa Allroad, but both are available with custom paint, including a stunning chrome-like finish that is truly lustworthy. There are also multiple complete builds (including with Rotor’s rare UNO fully hydraulic groupset), as well as bare framesets for DIYers.

My 52cm Alfa Allroad test sample was built with a Campagnolo Super Record EPS disc-brake groupset, Industry Nine AR25 aluminum tubeless clincher wheels, and Fizik carbon fiber finishing kit. Total weight without pedals was a fantastic 7.48kg (16.49lb).

A vision in green

Allied went for a road bike-like feel for the Alfa Allroad, and after spending nine solid months on my test sample (resplendent in PPG “Time to Lime” paint), I’d say the company hit the bullseye.

I spent as least as much time with the Alfa Allroad off-pavement as I did on tarmac, and even hit a fair bit of singletrack.

Bikes in this category offer a range of ride characteristics that’s far broader than what we see on the road. At one end of the spectrum is the Trek Checkpoint, with a couch-like ride that glides across the ground, but without a generous amount of feedback for the rider. That one seems best suited for someone who is eager to do some long-distance jaunts on mixed terrain, and most definitely doesn’t want to feel at all beat-up in the process. In fact, that person perhaps doesn’t want to feel anything at all, and that’s not necessarily a bad thing.

At the other end of the spectrum, the Scott Addict Gravel’s enormous carbon tubes make for a hyper-efficient feel that’s an absolute rocket ship when you mash on the pedals. It’s a wickedly quick machine, but also one that relies entirely on its higher-volume tires to provide even a smidgeon of comfort.

Handling characteristics vary substantially with gravel/all-road bikes, too. That Checkpoint is soft-riding, but is nevertheless one of the quicker-handling bikes of the bunch. Conversely, the Addict Gravel’s lazier front end demands a more ham-fisted pilot willing to manhandle it through tighter bends.

The seatstays take a dead-straight path from end to end.

The Alfa Allroad strikes its own unique blend. It’s somewhere in between the Checkpoint and Addict Gravel in terms of ride quality, with a firm-but-not-unreasonably-so personality. It relies more on tire squish than frame flex to help shield the rider from impact forces, like the Scott, but the way it does so isn’t quite as extreme. There’s still a bit of give, and very good damping overall, but as is the case with so many bikes, the rear end rides more smoothly than the front, which is still a bit stiffer vertically than I’d prefer. It wasn’t until later in the testing process, after installed a Redshift Sports ShockStop suspension stem with the firmest elastomer kit, that I got the front-end feel I was ultimately looking for. (A standalone review of the Redshift Sports ShockStop suspension stem is coming soon).

In terms of handling, the Alfa Allroad is definitely the nimble beast that Allied intended. It’s quick and darty, and eager to change its path when asked to do so. Coupled with the relatively short (for the category) wheelbase, the Alfa Allroad is far from a relaxed cruiser that’s ok with you dozing off at the wheel. In fact, it’s much more akin to a traditional cyclocross bike in this sense compared with most gravel bikes on the market.

Die-hard gravel riders will invariably be put off by those road-handling manners, but that’s also what makes it such a superbly versatile machine if your days are truly spent on a mix of paved and unpaved surfaces, as opposed to tackling something like the Dirty Kanza 200.

And versatile the Alfa Allroad most certainly is. In fact, it’s almost two-faced.

Allied officially approves the Alfa Allroad for tires up to 38mm-wide (33mm-wide ones are pictured here).

Lots of drop-bar bikes on the market today claim to deliver “all-in-one” performance, but the Alfa Allroad comes closest to actually delivering on that of everything I’ve ridden to date, and the one whose personality seems most affected by swapping different wheels and tires. The well-heeled Alfa Allroad owner would have two — maybe even three — wheel-and-tire setups at their disposal to suit the ride at hand: a full-blown road arrangement for fast group rides on pavement; and a wider and burlier gravel configuration for exploring backroads and singletrack.

I regularly swapped between the Industry Nine AR25 wheelset and 33mm-wide Schwalbe X-One Speed tires, and the deeper-section Enve SES 4.5 AR Disc carbon clinchers shod with 28mm-wide (30.5mm-wide actual width) Specialized S-Works Tubeless tires. Set up in the latter configuration, I never felt like I was losing anything relative to a traditional road bike in terms of speed or efficiency, and the smaller tires also brought the additional benefit of slightly reducing the trail dimension for snappier handling. As a nice bonus, I also dropped about 200g of rotating weight in the process.

As compared to a dedicated road racer, the Alfa Allroad in that setup felt just as efficient, just as quick, and provided just as aggressive a position.

The bolt heads for the flat-mount rear disc-brake caliper stick out a bit from the underside of the chainstay. It would have been nice if those were recessed for a cleaner look, but that’s definitely splitting hairs. Overall, the area is quite well done, and the direct-mount design (no adapters required) of Campagnolo’s new hydraulic disc brakes certainly helps.

On the other hand, maxing out the 38mm tire clearance with a set of Specialized Sawtooth tires brought out the other side of the Alfa Allroad’s personality. The bigger, heavier, and slower-rolling tires toned down the frame’s responsiveness, but it also allowed for more rigorous exploring of local trails. Pinch flats are a regular occurrence here in Colorado on account of the persistently rocky ground, but those obviously became less of a concern with the larger air volume as compared to those Schwalbe X-One Speeds, and much hooliganism commenced as a result.

Ultimately, I spent most of my time on the Industry Nine AR25 and Schwalbe X-One Speed combination, merely adjusting pressure depending on the day. Only occasionally did I wish for more conditions-specific rolling stock (at least for solo rides), and the more I rode the Alfa Allroad, the more I questioned my need for multiple drop-bar bikes. I wouldn’t say that the Alfa Allroad can do everything with equal aplomb, but it excels at the type of riding I’m most apt to do these days: fast solo rides on pavement and dirt, mixed with a healthy dose of reasonable-condition singletrack and backwoods paths.

Growing pains

Allied Cycle Works/HIA Velo may have a lot of accumulated industry experience behind it, but I still noted a few details on my Alfa Allroad tester that I’d like to see ironed out moving forward.

The internal seatpost binder held tight and stayed quiet throughout testing, and the bolt is reasonably easy to access with a torque wrench or multi-tool. It’d be nice if Allied were to include some sort of rubber cover to keep water out, though, especially given the top-facing steel bolt, which is sure to corrode given enough road spray, rainfall, or washings.

Electronic transmissions share the same port as mechanical ones, but the treatment in electronic guise somehow looks a bit clumsy.

Allied’s convertible internal routing system is visually neat, what with its stylized eagle-shaped aluminum plate covering the access port on the top tube, but things aren’t as refined out back. The Alfa Allroad frame uses the same exit point on the chainstay for both wired electronic and mechanical transmissions, but the result isn’t as finished-looking for the former. The vestigial hole for the front derailleur could use some sort of cosmetic cap, too.

Finally, I’d be remiss if I didn’t lament the lack of fender mounts on the Alfa Allroad. Given the generous clearances on tap, plus the versatility that the design provides, it’s unfortunate that Allied didn’t include an elegant way to let you keep enjoying all of that when road surfaces are wet. There’s plenty of room here, and given that Allied manufactures all of its own stuff, one would think there’s certainly the freedom to do so.

A carbon bike with soul?

One thing I can’t complain about much, however, is the price, which is not only competitive with many major brands, but even manages to undercut them in certain configurations.

Considering the Alfa Allroad’s US origins, that’s quite an achievement — basically all of the cost-savings are achieved purely by maintaining an efficient process from start to finish instead of minimizing labor costs.

Speaking of which, many riders like to talk about how hand-built bikes made out of metal have “soul,” whereas molded carbon-fiber bikes are somehow cold and lifeless. However, that can be said of any mass-produced frame produced by some nameless face in a factory you’ve never seen or heard of, be it metal or otherwise. For sure, neither the Alfa or Alfa Allroad are bespoke creations handled by a single craftsman from start to finish, but it’s still real people building these things.

If you were to purchase an Allied Alfa Allroad, chances are good that you’ll never actually speak to one of the people who laid hands on it while it was being made. But that said, it’s worth a reminder that carbon frames are built by people, too, and at least for American customers, the ones at Allied are a little closer to home than usual.

alliedcycleworks.com

The Allied Alfa Allroad is a prime example of what an all-road bike can (and perhaps, should) be: light, responsive, nimble, and capable.

Not a car in sight. Just the way it should be, and an experience the Alfa Allroad easily lets you seek out.

A quick swap of wheels and tires, and the Allied Alfa Allroad is a superb road bike with quick handling, a stout chassis, and an aggressive riding position.

Conventional 25mm-wide road tires would suit the Allied Alfa Allroad just fine, of course, but it’s better with bigger-volume treads like the 28c Specialized S-Works Tubeless (which, when mounted to these Enve 4.5 AR Disc wheels, measure closer to 31mm).

Allied equips the Alfa Allroad with a conventional 68mm-wide threaded bottom bracket for easy servicing, but you can see how the down tube, seat tube, and chainstays make full use of the available space.

The top tube appears to flow right into the seatstays.

Alllied did a nice job of incorporating the wedge-type seatpost binder without adding a lot of visual bulk to the area.

Should I have opted for the taller head tube on the test bike? Maybe, but regardless, it’s nice to see that Allied offers buyers the option.

The top tube sports a rounded rectangular shape up at the head tube, but turns more oval as it makes its way back to the seat tube.

Inside the sculpted head tube is a tapered 1 1/8-to-1 1/4in carbon fiber steerer tube.

The threaded thru-axle inserts are replaceable at both ends.

The carbon fiber fork that Allied has designed for the Alfa Allroad is unusual in that it’s only 4mm longer than a conventional road fork, despite having much more tire clearance.

How’d Allied do it, you wonder? By making the crown very shallow.

Allied has done a very nice job of gracing the Alfa Allroad fork with an elegant shape, even with the replaceable 12mm thru-axle hardware and flat-mount disc interface.

33mm-wide tires (such as the Schwalbe X-One Speed shown here) are clearly no problem for the low-profile fork crown and widely spaced legs.

Allied has seemingly borrowed a page from the cyclocross world’s playbook with a smoothly profiled bottom bracket shell that leaves no ledges on which mud and debris can accumulate. The exposed (and in this, case unused) front derailleur cable port is another story.

Allied has taken a very purpose-driven approach to the Alfa Allroad’s frame design. The front triangle is shared with the standard road-going Alfa.

The front brake hose is intelligently routed, with an entry point location that prevents rubbing on the head tube.

The rear flat-mount interface is barely visible beneath the brake caliper. The included 12mm tooled thru-axle has a low-profile head that rests flush with the stays.

Swappable ports that can be converted for electronic or mechanical drivetrains aren’t something that Allied invented, but the company has very cleverly integrated its logo into the design.

The solid paint scheme used on my test bike couldn’t be more understated, aside from the bright green hue, of course, and a few bits of metallic lettering.

Understated and elegant. Allied’s story won’t resonate with everyone, but it will undoubtedly strike a chord with many.

HIA Velo was founded by Tony Karklins, who was formerly the managing director of Orbea USA. When he heard that Guru Cycles had gone out of business and that all of its assets were going up for auction, he flew up to Canada mostly on a whim. But as it turns out, he was the only bidder who wanted the entire lot, and all of it was eventually transported down to Little Rock, Arkansas, where Karklins would eventually use that equipment to realize his dream of building carbon fiber bicycle frames in the United States. “I entered cycling as a bike shop kid and junior racer,” he said. “The movie Breaking Away forever changed my life. I can watch it again and again. But I knew my racing days were numbered when I was 15 or 16 and lined up against a brash kid from Texas that won our race and bridged up to the senior race that had started nearly 10 minutes before us that day. Yep, it was Lance. When I was 18 or 19, I visited Italy for my first time and toured a few factories including De Rosa and Casati. I will never forget that feeling of watching those masters, with torch in hand, building world-class machines. That has forever inspired me. I take enormous pride in what we are building at Allied Cycle Works. We are doing what others said was impossible. Don’t get me wrong, it’s hard work, but it is the right way to work. Our investment flows into job creation and training for the American worker and not into large quantities of inventory sourced from the cheapest labor possible.” Photo: Dustin Williams.

Engineering director Sam Pickman cut his teeth at Specialized before hooking up his wagon to Tony Karklins’ crazy idea to form a US-based carbon fiber bicycle frame company., and describes himself as a “nerdy 37 year-old guy with a young family who has been obsessed with bikes all my life,” adding, “I have done so many stupid things on a bike — any ride over 200km, doing insanely risky things to avoid extra miles while riding home cracked from training rides, riding poorly made prototypes and getting stranded when they break, traversing over a fresh landslide to avoid doing extra miles, and riding in pitch-black darkness for hours when my light crapped out.” Photo: Dustin Williams.

Paint department manager Jim Cunningham founded CyclArt in 1976, and enjoyed an enviable career of painting bicycle frames. He has an extensive collection of vintage bikes, and also keeps his spray gun trigger finger in peak condition racing slot cars. Photo: Dustin Williams.

Susan Cunningham also works in the paint and finishing department, handling joint overwrapping and paint-masking duties. In addition to being an avid cyclist, she also spends a lot of time hiking, all in the name of feeding her curiosity about the natural world. Photo: Dustin Williams.

If you haven’t gathered by now, carbon lay-up is extremely labor-intensive. Timothy Floyd is another lay-up technician for HIA Velo, and spends as much time outdoors as possible when he isn’t placing swatches of carbon-fiber into molds. Cycling actually really isn’t his thing, though; you’re more likely to find him hunting, fishing, and hiking. Photo: Dustin Williams.

Ileana Perez is one of Allied’s more experienced layup technicians, and also helps with training and product development. Among her favorite things to do? Listen to music, sleep, and go shopping. Photo: Dustin Williams.

Yet another layup technician is Jenny Quiceno, who dreams of traveling and experiencing different cultures. Photo: Dustin Williams.

Vince Daugherty spends his hours at Allied preparing frames to be painted, but his evenings and weekends riding and working on motorcycles. He’s also an avid history buff. Photo: Dustin Williams.

Melissa Smith is another lay-up technician at HIA Velo — a far cry from the faceless robots people sometimes associate with carbon frame manufacturing. Photo: Dustin Williams.

Layup technician Diana Oropeza loads individual plies of pre-preg carbon fiber into the molds that will eventually become parts of each Allied Alfa Allroad frame and fork. Photo: Dustin Williams.

If you buy a complete Allied bike, are you wondering who might build it? It’s this guy, Leif Kruse, who also overwraps the carbon joints at the seatstays and chainstays after they’re bonded, but before they’re sanded. Fun fact: He used to live on a sailboat. Photo: Dustin Williams.

Frame finisher Randy Russell knows a thing or two about making sure a surface is perfect before it’s painted. He spends much of his spare time working on old hot-rod pickup trucks. He’s also an avid hunter and a big fan of American football and baseball. Photo: Dustin Williams.

Jack Daugherty is one of the people at HIA Velo who makes sure each Allied frame that goes out the door is visually perfect. He’s also a former chef with 20 years of experience, a Jiu-Jitsu instructor, and an avid cyclist. As if that weren’t enough, he’s also been married for 17 years, considers himself a semi-professional “cat wrangler,” and the unofficial authority within the company on the Subaru WRX STi. Photo: Dustin Williams.

The post Allied Alfa Allroad long-term review: The antidote to the N+1 rule appeared first on CyclingTips.

With so many new helmets boasting aero benefits, it’s easy to forget that most cyclists don’t give a damn about such marginal gains. Instead, it’s safety, comfort, cooling ability, and low weight that most people look for in a helmet.

First seen at the 2017 Tour de France, Kask’s latest helmet, the Valegro, is the company’s lightest and most ventilated to date. It doesn’t replace the aero-tested and already impressively lightweight Protone, but rather complements it at the top of the range.

If the Valegro were a bike, it’d be an ultralight climbing machine, whereas the Protone would be the lightweight all-rounder with an aero cockpit and wheelset. They’re close, and certainly, they overlap somewhat, but there’s enough of a difference for most to know which features they value most.

I was handed a sample of the new Valegro during this year’s Santos Tour Down Under, and have been testing it since. There is lots to love, but every relationship has its trials.

It’s light. Very light

So light it can sit on a fern.

Weighing in at just 186g for an Australian standard size small (50-56cm), this is an insanely lightweight lid, especially when you consider the relatively bulky leather chinstrap. Australian standards-approved (AS/NZS 2063) helmets are almost always heavier than ones made for European or American markets, too, and so if you’re outside New Zealand or Australia, you can expect an even lower figure.

To put the Valegro’s weight into perspective, a small-sized Kask Mojito helmet weighs 239g, while Kask’s newer Protone is said to weigh 215g. The 30g weight saving seems minimal in terms of absolutes, but it’s more than a 10% reduction on an already lightweight lid.

To achieve such a low weight, Kask created a simple round shape that wastes little material, all while trimming weight at every other possible point. For example, the retention system is minimal, and the side straps are fixed (both the same as the Protone). And with 37 ventilation holes, there’s only so much space left for the supporting foam.

Despite being so light, the lower edge is still protected with a wraparound microshell.

Helping trim weight further, the helmet is rather shallow with no extended coverage for the back of your head or temples. While I can’t comment on the actual safety of the helmet, I can say that Kask at least hasn’t sacrificed everyday durability, with the in-moulded polycarbonate shell extending to the lower edge of the helmet so the underlying foam won’t take too much of a beating in everyday use.

Take a peek inside and there’s no shortage of channels to guide the air from the many vents through the helmet and out the back. The Valegro was supposedly designed with the help of a wind tunnel, but rather than focusing on drag reduction, the time was used to test thermo-cooling. Kask isn’t alone in this approach (Giro used instrumented wind tunnel testing for this also), but it’s a good sign nonetheless.

More important than the number of vents is having clear paths for that air to travel inside the helmet, and the Valegro definitely checks that box.

Look front-on and the Valegro offers clear entry and exit points for air to flow through. The most obvious vents that sit above the brow are kept open and sit away from the forehead, while the padding begins just to the side of the two central vents and extends back from there.

The 5mm-thick multi-layer foam pads are said to be anti-static, anti-bacterial, and moisture transferring, but the amount of padding is fairly minimal overall, with just a few removable strips around the top, and just a tiny bit at the forehead.

How it performs

Helmets are much like saddles: what’s comfortable for one person isn’t likely comfortable for the next. I’ve always preferred more oval-shaped options, and the Valegro fits into this category nicely (pun intended). The “Octo Fit” retention system affords a huge range of vertical, horizontal, and circumferential tuning, and I was able to easily dial it in for a comfortable hold. One small nitpick is that the detents on the retention system are perhaps a little too light, as even a quick flick of my head could sometimes change the settings.

There’s a huge adjustment range on offer.

The fixed strap splitters sit in an ideal location below my ears, though, and also comfortable was the leather chin strap, which is claimed to be minimally irritating, especially for guys with stubble. Kask has used the faux leather pad before, but this was the first time it worked well for me; the one on the otherwise-comfortable Kask Mojito sat too far rearward and pressed on my throat.

One long-standing complaint with Kask helmets is how they often interfere with many popular brands of eyewear. The Valegro addresses this with a small kink in the retention system that creates a gap for sunglass temples. Combined with the retention system’s generous adjustment range, I was finally able to comfortably wear my previously problematic Oakley Radar EVs, eyewear from Kask’s sister-company, KOO, and Ryder’s Roam Fyre. Likewise, even casual eyewear could be slotted in and used without issue.

This feature is still somewhat of a band-aid solution and a bit of a fiddle, especially if you’re putting on your glasses while riding, but I quickly got used to running the eyewear frame closely along my head until the ends found their way underneath the retention cage. This feature may still be a miss if you’re one to really crank down on the retention system, though, as doing so would just uncomfortably push the sunglass arms into your skull.

Subtle ridges provide space for sunglass arms to be slotted between your head and the helmet’s retention straps.

Speaking of sunglasses, the Valegro’s simple round profile works wonders for directly storing eyewear. I was able to easily tuck my Oakleys into the back of the helmet for a secure and flush fit, without having to worry about pointy edges rubbing the lens.

The Valegro also does really well in steamy weather at keeping your head cool, and riders who often find themselves in hot and humid conditions will likely find plenty of joy here. A good testament to the feathery weight, comfort, and ventilation is that I often entirely forgot I was testing this helmet.

With such minimal padding at the brow, there’s not much contingency for what doesn’t get wicked away.

Sweat management could still be a little better, however. The tiny amount of padding at the forehead can quickly get overwhelmed with perspiration, and if there isn’t enough airflow to dry the pads out, it doesn’t take long before sweat finds its way onto your eyebrows. The Valegro doesn’t necessarily perform worse than average in this respect, but helmets with more dedicated systems for keeping sweat out of your eyes, such as what Bell uses on the Zephyr, are notably better at keeping your face dry.

I like it

Impressively lightweight and with breezy ventilation, the Valegro is well worth your consideration. It’s actually now my favourite helmet, but it’s not an absolute home run. The limited protection at the back, the sweat that falls on my eyebrows, and somewhat delicate retention system stop this helmet from being something truly special. Still, if it fits, and low weight and plenty of vents are what you seek, you’ll likely be happy with your purchase.

The Kask Valegro is available in three sizes and a multitude of colours. It retails for US$250 / AU$299 / €189.

The Kask Valegro has a slim profile on your head.

The fixed splitters were comfortable for me and kept the straps clear of my ears.

Kask has “fixed” the sunglass compatibility issue by providing clearance for tucking the frames under. I had to run the cradle extremely low to take advantage of this feature, though.

Like many other lightweight road helmets, the Valegro offers minimal protection for the back of your head. Realistically, POC is one of the few brands to do it differently.

Another head shot, this time with KOO sunglasses.

A closer look at how the slim-framed KOO fit with its sibling Kask helmet. The thicker Oakley frames are no doubt a tighter fit, but they’re still comfortable.

Kask Valegro (right) vs Kask Mojito.

The Kask Valegro (right) has a much more rounded profile than the Kask Mojito.

A look inside reveals a bunch of channelling that links the many vents.

The Valegro offers a simple round shape.

The retention system is designed to be run low.

The cradle pads are adjustable horizontally.

Fixed strap splitters are becoming increasingly common.

The leather chin strip is supposedly better for sensitive skin than standard nylon webbing.

Ok.

A soft carry bag is included with the Valegro.

The post Kask Valegro helmet review: Feathery and airy appeared first on CyclingTips.

Gravel is one murky sub-segment of cycling. Ask five riders to define gravel riding and you’ll likely get at least that many divergent answers, and one brand’s gravel bike might be noticeably different to another one. And yet, however hard it is to define, there’s no denying that cyclists are flocking to unsealed roads, long-lost paths and previously boring mountain bike trails as quickly as tensions with other tarmac users rise.

Group road rides, commuting, bikepacking or fire road shredding – a gravel bike can do it all (or so the industry claims). Depending on what you’re trying to do, it may not be the most efficient or the most comfortable, but it’ll get you through it and to where you’re wanting to go. Some gravel bikes balance the subtly different usages impressively well, while others, such as the Giant’s new ToughRoad, lean to a specific segment. And the ToughRoad does it at a budget price.

A typical gravel build

Over the past few years, Giant have had their share of bikes that could be classified (or used) as a gravel bike, and yet, the new value-oriented aluminium ToughRoad SLR GX is one of the manufacturer’s first offerings that specifically mentions the “G word.” Bordering somewhat on the “monstercross” or even bikepacking end of the gravel segment, the ToughRoad GX is a difficult bike to catergorise, especially given that the ToughRoad SLR platform isn’t even devoted to the drop-bar gravel category. There’s another version, which drops the “GX” moniker, that features a flat handlebar and otherwise much of the same build.

For the drop-bar GX version, it’ll certainly do gravel. It can fit fat 700c rubber. And it is ready for pannier racks, too. In many ways, it’s a different beast to the performance-orientated gravel rigs we’ve seen pushed by comparably large bike companies, and is more akin to the smaller group of burly do-it-all gravel machines and off-road tourers from niche brands, such as those offered by Salsa or Otso.

No matter how murky the categorisation of a gravel bike is, there is some consistency in build kits between brands. You can typically expect disc brakes, knobby tyres between 35-42c in width, drop handlebars that are either flared or wider than normal, and a wide-range drivetrain, such as SRAM’s 1x-specific drivetrain that’s often visible on higher-end builds. The ToughRoad ticks all of these boxes.

Priced at AU$2,399 / US$1,735, the tested ToughRoad SLR GX 0 sits at the top of the ToughRoad range. Each ToughRoad SLR GX model features the same ALUXX SLR aluminium frameset (Giant’s top tier aluminium grade) and carbon composite fork with a straight aluminium steerer tube.

Every tube has been manipulated in some form.

The ToughRoad SLR frameset is what’s expected of modern aluminium from a leading manufacturer. Hydroforming was once a radical process, but Giant now regularly subjects nearly every aluminium frame tube to a mix of pressurized fluid and external moulds to form carbon-like frame shapes that were previously thought impossible in metal. The top tube on the ToughRoad SLR is slender and tapered from end to end, the seat tube has a D-shaped cross-section, and although the down tube was round when it was originally drawn, it’s now boxy and rectangular. All of the tubes are joined with consistent-looking TIG welds, and often by hand.

Showing the somewhat recreational utility intention of this frameset, there’s a kickstand mount at the rear dropout. Likewise, quick-release dropouts feature front and rear, a clear price consideration in a market where thru-axles are fast becoming the norm for anything with disc brakes. Giant may consider the standard threaded bottom bracket as another budget choice, too, but it’s frankly a welcomed feature to my eyes.

Pannier mounts are kept hidden behind these plates until required.

The front and rear pannier mounts are kept rather subtle, hidden behind Giant-branded covers that provide a cleaner look if you’re not interested in using racks or fenders. It’s a similar story on the fork, with the nearly flush mounts sitting quietly until required.

Giant first introduced D-shaped seatposts on the Defy range of endurance road bikes, and it’s now a common theme through much of the range, including on the ToughRoad SLR. According to Giant, the flat back is more flexible than a round post, and with so much of it sticking out of the sloping frame, the aim is a more comfortable ride. The post is held with an integrated wedge-type binder that sits within a hollowed-out nook in the top tube.

There’s so much tyre clearance on the ToughRoad SLR that you’d be excused for thinking it started life as a mountain bike that had been converted for gravel use. The gaps surrounding the 39.5mm-wide tyres (measured width) are more obvious than Madonna’s front teeth.

Plenty of clearance surrounds the 700x40c rubber.

No doubt, the ToughRoad is ready to be expanded for truly cruel off-road mischief. An enormous 700x50mm tyre will fit in the 60mm-wide space between the chainstays – likely with room for a fender – and although it was tight, I even managed to squeeze a 29×2.25” (53mm actual width) tyre in the back.

The fork widens the gap further to 75mm, leaving space for a fender around that same 29×2.25in tyre. The 425mm axle-to-crown length is a substantial 43mm taller than Enve’s Gravel Road Disc fork, too, although that’s still not quite long enough to be swapped out for a mountain bike suspension fork without affecting the frame geometry.

The ToughRoad hides its cables beneath the X-Defender down tube guard, which also serves as the mount for the included mini-fender shown here.

Only the front brake hose is routed internally, entering the carbon fork at the crown and then popping back out down near the dropout. Otherwise, the full-length gear housing and rear brake hose run along the bottom of the down tube, shielded by a plastic bolt-on down tube protector. Three bolts secure the full-length guard to the frame, while an optional front fender can be bolted on over the top of the protector.

As tested, the ToughRoad SLR GX 0 offers a solid build kit that mimics high-end bikes from the performance end of the gravel segment. The 1×11 SRAM Apex 1 HRD drivetrain combines a 40T chainring with an 11-42T cassette, the same ratios used on the recently tested Cannondale SuperX SE, and further proves the off-road intention of this bike. That SRAM groupset also includes hydraulic Apex disc brakes with 160mm front and rear rotors.

Inline with every other 2018 Giant bike pitched at the enthusiast rider or higher, the ToughRoad comes set up tubeless. This means Giant’s own 40c CrossCut Gravel 2 knobby tyres and PX-2 wheels are shipped without tubes, but rather two small bottles of relabeled Stan’s tyre sealant.

The rest of the build kit also carries Giant’s branding, including the alloy flared drop bar and square-profiled stem. A Giant saddle sits atop the composite D-Fuse post.

All told, my complete sample weighed 9.95kg (21.94lb), without pedals but with the front fender. Light the ToughRoad SLR GX 0 is most certainly not, but that’s to be expected given the price point.

What is this thing?

As dumb as it sounds, it took some time before I figured out exactly what the ToughRoad SLR GX was trying to be. Its build kit shouts new-age gravel, but the general frame design and geometry figures are clearly eager to be loaded with bags and ridden until food rations run low. Having ridden the ToughRoad on road rides, rocky trails, and gravel grinds, I can attest to it loving the dirt, and being somewhat of a drag on the tarmac. On the road, the ride is akin to pedaling a decent 29er mountain bike: upright and with the persistent rumbling of tyre drag.

All sizes of the ToughRoad share a 70mm bottom bracket drop, 42mm fork rake, and 450mm chainstay length. The wheelbase on a medium is 1048mm.

The weight obviously plays into the overall feel, but the frame geometry is also clearly better suited to off-road excursions. Stretched 450mm chainstays and a lazy 70.5-degree head tube make for a long wheelbase that great favour stability over agility. Yet the 42mm of fork rake yields a lot of trail, and a lot of “wheel flop.” It’s something you notice most in loose corners, with the front tyre feeling like it wants to wash out. Larger sizes offer a half-degree steeper head tube and are likely to be a little better off in this department, but not in a major way.

Such a high trail figure can be forgiven on a bike that’s carrying a heavy rear load, but even still, a little extra fork rake would be welcomed here. Not only would it liven up the handling, it may also be just enough to fix the slight toe overlap with the front wheel (which is pretty normal in smaller-sized gravel bikes). Changing the fork is a possible fix, but it’s something a buyer of a bike at this price shouldn’t need to consider.

Razor-sharp agility may not be the ToughRoad’s strong suit, but it does get better the faster you go – and the rougher the terrain gets, the more the ToughRoad and its tall front stance shines. I found myself motoring along a rocky firetrail at 40km/h, my skinny biceps flapping like I was riding Roubaix cobbles and the tyres kicking up all sorts of debris. Despite the chaos, the ToughRoad felt planted and eager for more, and was never unnerving.

Likewise, that “don’t give a damn” stability lends the ToughRoad to being a great commuter. Swap the tyres out for something smoother, load it up with lights, fenders, and panniers and it’ll serve you well.

Giant’s D-Fuse composite seatpost works as claimed. There is a visible amount of flex.

Aluminium frames have come a long way from the filling-rattling ride of years past. With its high-volume tubeless rubber, subtly tapered tube shapes, and visibly flexible D-Fuse seatpost, the ToughRoad’s ride is akin to sitting on a padded wooden stool. Your hands don’t get the same benefit, though, as the alloy steerer doing little to keep shock from coming through the handlebar.

The ToughRoad is capable of handling much more than the lightly loaded setup shown here.

Those long chainstays help to create a stable ride, but also provide clearance for panniers. The aluminium frame is certainly up to the task of being weighed down, but it’s lacking in accessory mounts with just two bidons and those front and rear panniers accounted for. Plenty of strap-on options exist, of course, but they’re obviously not as clean-looking.

The 40T chainring and 42T sprocket out back seem like plenty at first glance, and indeed, it provides a much easier gear than a compact crank with an 11-34T cassette. however, there were times I still wanted more. And certainly, if you’re looking to load this bike up like it’s intended and hit the hills, you likely will, too. Sizing down to a 38T chainring may be warranted, but you’ll be giving up top-end speed as a result.

Likewise, the narrow-wide chainring and clutched rear derailleur should provide ample chain security – at least in theory. But I found the limits of the design, throwing the chain on the same Roubaix-like jaunt I mentioned earlier. Granted, this was a very unusual occurrence and goes to show the type of terrain I was in where, other than the dropped chain, the ToughRoad was still laughing. Interestingly, Australian compliance laws require brands to provide geared bikes with a chain guide (some brands chuck a low-level front derailleur into the box to pass), and Giant did so with a reasonable quality resin chain guide. I initially chose to forgo it, but it’s clear that it’d be a good idea to keep it installed if you aim to test the ToughRoad’s limits.

SRAM’s Apex 1 HRD levers share an identical shape to the Rival and Force 1 levers.

SRAM’s road groupsets are masters of trickle-down, incorporating not just the same features on lower-end versions as the premium ones, but actually sharing most of the individual parts across the board. As such, the SRAM Apex 1 levers have the same hood shape and ergonomics of Rival 1 and Force 1, with the same comfortable and secure grip when riding off-road.

Even so, the Apex hydraulic discs offered the smooth and easy lever feel expected of a hydraulic system, but the levers still lacked the snappy return and feedback of higher-end models. I also experienced some squeal under heavy braking, a noise I haven’t heard from more expensive SRAM brakes as of late. Whether this is due to flex from the quick-release wheel retention, a failure to fully bed in the brakes, or simply contamination from the factory, I, unfortunately, don’t have an answer.

The rolling stock is a surprisingly good-quality setup given that the entire bike costs less than most wheelsets we typically review. The 19mm (internal width) tubeless alloy rims will take a beating, while the butted spokes and sealed bearing hubs should provide a reliable service life with minimal maintenance. However, such dependability at this price comes with an obvious weight disadvantage, and the wheels, along with the tyres, take a fair amount of effort to get up to speed or when tackling slow gravel climbs.

The Crosscut Gravel 2 tyres are well behaved on a mix of terrain, but a higher-end tyre will offer a noticeable improvement in other ways.

The tubeless tyres have proven durable, and while they’re well-rounded off-road, my preference would be to swap them for something a tad wider, a little more supple, and faster. This would further smooth the ride, save some grams, and ease your pedaling time on the road and smooth gravel.

The rest of Giant’s components do the job well. The flared bars provide greater control and stability off-road, but the reach is also a little long for my liking. And admittedly, I’m not a fan of the somewhat narrow saddles typically found on Giant bikes, but given how personal such things are, it’s hardly a criticism.

Finally, I think Giant’s entire “adventure” range, consisting of the Revolt (discontinued), the AnyRoad, and now the ToughRoad, all share a similarly unusual and polarising aesthetic. To be fair, the ToughRoad is certainly the nicest of the bunch, and the subdued charcoal paint and boxy shapes give it a rugged look, but the highly sloping top tube and compact frame is sure to scare many traditionalists away.

giant-bicycles.com

The ToughRoad sits at the exploration end of the gravel spectrum. It’s built tough, and has plenty of tyre clearance to see it tackle whatever you’re willing to point it at.

Crusing with the ToughRoad on gravel roads of the Hawkesbury region, northwest of Sydney.

Post mount brake mounts and quick release dropouts. The ToughRoad’s frame is built to a price, but there’s also a lot of practicality baked into the design.

It’s the same story up front.

The 700x40c tyre looks tiny given the massive clearances on tap.

The fork features reflective decals.

There’s plenty of fluid formed tubing to be seen.

The optional down tube-mounted front fender doesn’t provide as much coverage as a traditional one, but it still keeps a lot of muck away from you.

Without the front fender in place, the X-Defender beneath still hides the cables and protects the frame from rock strikes.

Full length housing is guided beneath the plastic down tube guard.

Those aren’t mounts for racks or fenders; they’re for a bolt-on kickstand.

A wedge-style seat binder holds the post in place, and needs a decent amount of grease to keep it from creaking.

SRAM’s Apex 1 drivetrain borrows many features from more expensive versions.

The Apex 1 alloy crank uses SRAM’s own four-bolt chainring mount. The smallest chainring SRAM offer for this crank is a 38T.

The clutch mechanism in SRAM’s rear derailleur helps with chain retention over rough terrain.

The Giant Connect XR Ergo-Control handlebar’s flared drops improve wrist clearance and provide greater control when off-road.

The compact drop shape is nice, but I prefer handlebars with a shorter reach to the hoods.

Giant supply their own saddles to match the rest of the cockpit.

A peak inside the hubs reveals sealed bearings.

The bike is shipped with the pictured chainguide and two bottles of tyre sealant. The chainguide isn’t entirely necessary, but might be a good idea if you anticipate tackling especially challenging terrain on the ToughRoad.

The post Giant ToughRoad SLR GX 0 2018 review: Budget-minded adventurer appeared first on CyclingTips.

Athanaël Guitard’s sister, Aliciane, carefully twirled her blank white canvas in its stand, making sure not to smudge the acrylic marker that took half an hour to dry. Her brother had given her few instructions: Include the frame maker’s logo, Caminade, and the logo of his own web agency, Irisio. He told her to sign her own name, and to base her designs in nature. Other than that, her marker was free to roam. It took more than forty hours before she was finished.

There’s a house floating away on blue and red and white balloons. A cactus rises out of the downtube. A starfish hides behind the crank spider. ‘All you need is velo’ written across the top of the top tube and ‘Made in France’ sits on its underside, a few inches from Aliciane’s name.

The bike she painted stood out like a wildflower in a prairie, hung by its saddle amongst a dozen earth and metal-tone Caminade gravel bikes. We were in Perpignan, on the far eastern edge of the Pyrenées, at the launch event for Mavic’s Allroad line. There were more expensive bikes hanging there, titanium frames and springy Lauf forks and high-end builds. But none quite like Athanaël’s.

Aliciane is an artist. A designer, to be specific. “It was enjoyable for her,” Athanaël says. “To spend some good time, to relax, I sent her the frame and she spent some… not some, many, many hours drawing and redrawing the graphics of the frame.”

“I gave her a few leads, natural things. Just some little touches of colors. She was free to do whatever she liked.”

The result is an intricate, deeply personal design, unlike anything I’ve seen outside of a handmade show like NAHBS. Nothing else about the bike is fancy. It’s built with a SRAM Rival group, Mavic Allroad wheels and tires, aluminum Ritchey bars. “It’s built to ride, and also to look at,” Athanaël says with a smile.

Underneath Aliciane’s paint job is a Caminade Gravel Steel frame. It takes 650b or 700c tires, up to 48mm for the former and 38mm for the latter, but is mostly run with 650b. They’re a better match for the Athanaël’s riding.

Caminade is a custom builder based in Ille-sur-Têt, France. It makes Ti frames and steel frames with a heavy focus on gravel riding, which is blooming in the region. “Our roads aren’t very good at all,” says Athanaël, who lives 10km away from Caminade’s headquarters. “So this kind of bike, it’s the one.”

The company was founded by a French duo, Silvain and Brice, intent on bringing manufacturing back to this small corner of France. It builds bikes one-by-one, with custom geometry, built and painted to order. They sell direct to consumers, and source as much as they can from French providers. The TIG welded frames are reasonably priced — just 1,500 euros for Athanaël’s steel model. The titanium version, which uses the same visually intriguing sloping top tube, is just under 3,000 euros.

The company’s new AllRoad titanium frame, which was ridden by about half the group at the Mavic launch, uses titanium tubes and a unique carbon fiber lug design. It allows Caminade to offer custom geometry at prices that are frankly astounding. An AllRoad built with Apex is under 2,800 euros, complete. Yes, under 3k for a custom titanium gravel bike.

Athanaël lives nearby Caminade headquarters, down the valley to the west. The paved roads in this region are often full of cars and are rarely well maintained, so cyclists here have taken to gravel. The network of dirt feels never-ending.

“Gravel is everything, the whatever-you-want-to-do bike,” he says. “You want to ride road? Okay, it works. You want to ride gravel? You can do it. You can even do singletrack, but you have to be extra careful of course.”

He ordered his Gravel with standard medium/large geometry and didn’t make any tweaks from what Caminade recommended. While he was waiting for parts, he passed the frame off to his sister.

The painting process started with a white base coat. Then it was brushed with another paint that left open pores and allowed the pen to stick. “She used a special brand of marker with acrylic paint,” Athanaël says. “She could have used a brush, but a bit easier with a marker. She had to be very careful because the ink paint takes many minutes, even hours, to dry. She couldn’t touch it. She definitely smudged it a couple times and had to do a part again.”

Dozens of hours later, the work was done. Caminade applied a clearcoat and Athanaël built it up with a sensible, functional build.

“The bike is everything,” Athanaël says, pointing at the ‘All you need is velo’ script on the top tube. “It’s even better when your sister made it for you.”

Build details

Frame: Caminade Gravel steel
Fork: Columbus Mud Disc
Groupset: SRAM Rival
Wheels: Mavic Allroad
Tires: WTB Byway 47mm 650b
Seatpost: Deda Elementi
Saddle: Selle Italia SLR
Handlebars: Ritchey Venture Max
Stem:ShockStop suspension stem

The post Bikes of the Bunch: Intricate artwork on a Caminade Gravel appeared first on CyclingTips.

It perhaps shouldn’t have caught anyone off-guard when Oakley introduced bicycle helmets last year at the Eurobike trade show. After all, the eyewear icon had already expanded into snow helmets in early 2016, and given its long-standing position in the cycling world, it seemed to be a natural progression.

Out of the three-model range, the ARO5 is Oakley’s aero road model, and it certainly looks the part with its sleek shape. However, its venting leaves much to be desired, and Oakley has yet to offer up any hard data to support its aero claims, so one has to wonder how much of a drag advantage it really has to offer over a more conventional lid.

Ticking the boxes

Oakley has an enviable reputation when it comes to pushing the limits of design, and the ARO5 is undoubtedly distinctive, even in a more subdued color than the high-vis “Retina Burn” version I tested here. As is typically the case with aero-minded road helmets, the pleasantly low-profile exterior fits closely to your head, and the neatly clipped and rounded tail is a far cry from the spiky designs from just a few years ago, which were seemingly inspired more by the hairstyles of Japanese anime characters than wind tunnel testing.

Aside from the somewhat ostentatious “O” logo on the side, the ARO5 is actually quite visually subdued. Oakley seems to be letting the shape of the ARO5 do most of the talking here, and I think it’s a good move. Overall, I’d say it’s a good-looking helmet.

The Oakley ARO5 fits pleasantly close to the head. It’s a comfortable lid, too, thanks in part to the cozy Boa-based retention system, the slimline webbing, and the well-placed fixed splitters.

Not surprisingly given the company’s background, Oakley has put a lot of emphasis on how the ARO5 fits with your eyewear. The Boa FS1-1 retention system uses a whisper-thin fabric cord instead of the hard plastic strips more often used on cycling helmets, and it doesn’t interfere at all with even the longest ear stems on the market; they simply fit right over the cord and grip the sides of your head as intended.

The outer two forward-facing vents are perfectly placed for stashing your sunglasses when you don’t feel like wearing them, too, and long cutouts in the interior leave plenty of room for the sunglass arms, instead of uncomfortably squashing them between the helmet liner and your noggin. Oakley absolutely nailed this aspect, no question.

Speaking of vents, Oakley has taken a dichotomous approach to keeping your head cool. Although the overall external shape of the ARO5 is very similar to the Giro Air Attack, the venting arrangement couldn’t be more different.

You can certainly feel air hitting the front half of your head at higher speeds when wearing the Oakley ARO5.

Giro opted for just six small slits in the Air Attack, but supplemented them with a series of very deep internal channels to help circulate air in between that helmet’s foam liner and your head. Oakley has instead basically cut open the entire front half of the ARO5, creating four (well, six if you factor in the plastic reinforcing ring that bisects the two main ports) gaping vents that leave most of the front of your head fully exposed to oncoming air.

Up top is a single intake port presumably meant to help funnel air toward the back of your head, but the rear half of the ARO5 is otherwise virtually solid, with just the smallest of perforations present at the tail.

On the safety front, Oakley has equipped the ARO5 (and all of its cycling helmets, actually) with a MIPS low-friction liner, which is claimed to reduce the incidence of closed-head injuries by lessening the severity of rotational forces during a crash. Coverage is fairly minimal out back with the high-cut rear profile, but on the plus side, the dearth of vents there leaves a lot of foam on hand to help dissipate impact energy.

The retention system’s textile cord is entirely unnoticeable against your head, and doesn’t interfere at all with sunglass arms, at least on my small-to-medium-sized head.

Oakley offers the ARO5 in three sizes — all of which use a rather ovoid shape and seem to run smaller than usual — and seven color options. Retail price is US$250 / AU$300 / £200 / €250. Actual weight for a medium CPSC-approved US sample is 322g.

Missing the mark

The primary motivation for anyone interested in an aero road helmet is, of course, aerodynamic performance. But in this key area, it’s not entirely clear how aero the ARO5 truly is. Although the ARO5 looks the part to the untrained eye, a statement from Oakley only offers vague reassurances of the ARO5’s speediness.

“[The ARO5 is] verified to be among the fastest road helmets on the market via 31 iterations of extensive CFD testing vs. top competitors, wind tunnel testing, and professional athlete input and testing (mainly by Team Dimension Data).”

Even if you take Oakley’s aero claims at face value, the ARO5 has some other major downsides.

With no meaningful venting on the entire rear of the helmet, the Oakley ARO5 is truly stifling unless you’re traveling at a healthy speed.

Ventilation is always a compromise when it comes to aero road helmets, and few expect them to perform as well in that respect as a conventional lid with more openings. The ones that are good at funneling air across your head at higher speeds oftentimes feel hot on slower climbs, and the ones that do a better job of keeping your head cool at both high and low speeds don’t always perform that well in the wind tunnel. But even in that context, the ARO5 falls seriously short of the competition.

High-speed cooling ability is pretty good, and you can feel the air hitting much of the front half of your head at higher speeds. But there’s very little internal channeling on the ARO5, and what few of them there are are too shallow and serpentine to be meaningful. Air can come in, but a lot of vent area feels wasted since there’s no clear outbound flow. On other helmets with more effective internal shaping — such as the Giro Vanquish, Bontrager Ballista, and POC Ventral — there’s a veritable torrent of air cascading across the entire top (and sometimes, sides) of your head for far more effective cooling at cruising speeds.

It’s a similar situation with bugs. Anything that gets sucked into the forward ports has no choice but to keep bouncing around in there until you completely pull the helmet off your head. It’s like a reincarnation of the old Roach Motel advertisements in bike helmet form: bugs check in, but they can’t check out.

The upper intake port seems like it should help keep the top and back of your head cool, but a lack of proper internal channeling means the incoming air doesn’t have anywhere to go.

At slower speeds, the ARO5 is truly stifling. With no significant vents at all on the rear half of the helmet, heat has nowhere to escape when you’re laboring uphill. It turns out the internal channeling that is so effective on other aero road helmets at higher speeds is still beneficial at lower ones. Some models, like the Bontrager Ballista and Giro Synthe, also add perforated vent covers that effectively behave as if they’re solid at faster speeds while still letting you literally blow off some steam at slower ones. Unfortunately, the ARO5 benefits from none of these features.

Making matters far worse is the ARO5’s old-school browpad design. There’s almost no air space between the pad and foam liner, and even if there was some, the back of the pad is completely covered by the solid plastic MIPS liner so there’s zero chance sweat can evaporate. I set out one day on a pleasant spring morning with low humidity and temperatures hovering around just 16°C (61°F), with a plan to head up a local 7% climb that was well shaded. But despite the sub-threshold effort, there was so much sweat pouring out of the ARO5’s browpad that I felt more like Floyd Landis in Stage 17 of the 2006 Tour de France, dumping bottle after bottle on my head.

Add in some legitimate heat and humidity, or just a harder effort, and donning the ARO5 at anything other than higher speeds (say, 35km/h or more) makes you feel like a marshmallow at the wrong end of the roasting stick. It’s a good thing Oakley nailed the sunglass storage aspect of the ARO5, because you’ll need to keep them there a lot. But the worst part of the ARO5’s stifling feel was the fact that nearly every time I wore it, I had that awful Buster Poindexter song from the 1980s going through my head on endless loop.

Not surprisingly, Oakley has absolutely nailed the sunglass storage aspect of the ARO5 helmet. It’s easy to stash eyewear up there (provided they have straight earstems), and they hold on tight, too.

The ARO5 is otherwise quite comfortable. There’s a minimal amount of padding on the inside, but the smooth MIPS plastic liner seems to help make up for that. The thin webbing also sits nicely on the side of your face, and the fixed splitters leave plenty of room around your ears. Three height settings on the retention system make it easy to find the sweet spot, too.

You’d best exercise some care when the ARO5 isn’t on your head, however. The lower edge of the EPS foam liner is totally exposed, and there’s also a lot of uncovered foam up top as well. The two bare foam edges at the top of the two main forward-facing vents are particularly worrisome, and even after a few weeks of regular testing, my ARO5 sample is showing more scars than I’d prefer.

A decent first effort, but lots of room for improvement

Overall, Oakley has made a fair first stab at the aero road helmet segment, but given the premium pricing, the performance that it delivers on the road doesn’t make the ARO5 a particularly compelling option. Several other aero road helmets (like the Bontrager Ballista, POC Ventral, Specialized Evade II, and Giro Vanquish) manage to offer proven aerodynamic advantages while still doing a much better job of delivering reasonably balanced ventilation performance, too.

I’ll freely admit to being a fan of Oakley’s sunglasses; rarely has the company put out something that I didn’t feel was functionally superb (or often superior to the competitors), even if the styling wasn’t always to my liking. There will undoubtedly be plenty of Oakley devotees who will be willing to overlook the ARO5’s flaws to stay true to the brand, and the company’s first stab at an aero road helmet may suit you just fine if you’re only ever going to be moving quickly while wearing it.

But overall, even the most diehard of supporters won’t be able to deny that there are better options out there.

Visit oakley.com for more information.

The Oakley ARO5 reminds me of the Giro Air Attack with its trim profile and rounded shape. But nevertheless, it’s impossible to mistake one for the other, especially given the giant “O” logo on the side.

Oakley’s approach to ventilation on the ARO5 seems to comprise mostly of carving a bunch of gaping vents into the front.

Somehow, Oakley has managed to make a fluorescent yellow road helmet look really cool.

The bow-shaped panel on the rear of the Oakley ARO5 is also shared with the more highly ventilated ARO3 model.

The retention system is adjustable to three heights.

Interior padding is minimal on the Oakley ARO5, but the smooth MIPS plastic liner makes up for it to some extent.

The browpad design is disappointingly rudimentary, with seemingly no thought given to sweat management. The pad saturates quickly, and with no air space to help the absorbed perspiration evaporate, it doesn’t take long for it to start pouring down your face, even when it’s only moderately warm outside.

These older-style MIPS attachments can painfully snag and tear out hair if you’re not careful.

There’s a lot of exposed foam on the ARO5, including the entire lower edge and a fair bit of the top, too.

These sharper edges are especially concerning. The Oakley ARO5 isn’t cheap, and unless you’re especially careful about how you handle it, it won’t look new for long.

The post Oakley ARO5 helmet review: Feelin’ hot, hot, hot appeared first on CyclingTips.

The ZX-1 is Vitus’s new flagship race bike built around an aero road disc chassis. Like the brand’s other models, it is only available through online retail giants Wiggle and Chain Reaction Cycles, and at this stage, there is a choice of three distinct builds and pricepoints.

The ZX-1 CR1 sits in the middle of this collection with a build that features Shimano’s Ultegra Di2 groupset and Prime’s RP-50 carbon road disc wheelset. It’s clearly a race-oriented offering and in this review, Australian tech editor Matt Wikstrom takes a closer look at what the new bike has to offer riders.

Vitus, for those that are unfamiliar with the brand, has a rich history in professional cycling. The brand was launched in the late ‘70s to sell bonded alloy frames, which viewed as something of a technological breakthrough at the time. Vitus used high-strength epoxy to bond alloy tubes to cast alloy lugs and fittings, and while the construction strategy was really no different from a lugged steel frame, the materials offered significant weight savings and a fresh aesthetic for road bikes.

Vitus started working with carbon fibre in the early ‘80s, replacing the alloy tubes that made up the front triangle of its frames with composite versions. With the promise of even greater weight savings, the company went on to create carbon fibre tubes for the entire frame, culminating with the Carbone 9, which was unveiled in 1987, and weighed just over 1,300g.

Vitus’s bonded frames were embraced by professional racers, most notably Sean Kelly, who would ride the company’s frames to a multitude of victories. Those frames developed an unfortunate reputation for too much flex, and the bonded joints were also prone to failing. Vitus stumbled through the ‘90s until it faded from sight by the end of the decade, but before that happened, the company managed to develop and sell a monocoque carbon frame.

The original ZX-1 was unveiled in 1992 and was available until 1996. Photo courtesy Vive le Vélo!

The ZX-1 was not the first widely available monocoque carbon fibre frame on the market — that honour goes to Kestrel’s 4000 — but it still pre-dates a lot of brands. Photo courtesy Vive le Vélo!

No foils or Kamm tails here, just swooping lines. Photo courtesy Vive le Vélo!

Our understanding of bicycle aerodynamics has come a long way since the early ’90s, but it was built upon the ideas first tested by bikes like the ZX-1. Photo courtesy Vive le Vélo!

Launched in 1991, the ZX-1 was amongst the first wave of carbon monocoque frames on the market. The frame was designed for road riders and time-triallists, and had some aerodynamic features, such as a fairing for the rear wheel. According to collectors, less than 1,000 ZX-1 frames were ever made, and only a few hundred have survived unscathed to this day.

Needless to say, carbon fibre construction and aero road frame design have come a long way since the ZX-1. And while Vitus disappeared from the sport for over a decade, it was resurrected in 2012 when Chain Reaction Cycles acquired the rights to the name. That was followed by a return to the professional peloton in 2014 under Sean Kelly’s An Post team, so when the born-again brand started work on a new aero road bike, ZX-1 seemed like the perfect name for the project.

Breathing new life into the ZX-1

Creating the new ZX-1 was a major undertaking and Vitus devoted three years to the process. It was designed wholly in-house with Vitus undertaking CFD analysis to refine the aerodynamic profile of the frameset. And while a rim-brake version was part of the design process, Vitus decided to commit to disc brakes when it was time to move the ZX-1 into production.

At face value, the ZX-1 is not an obviously aerodynamic frame like the Scott Foil, Trek Madone, Canyon Aeroad, Merida Reacto, or Giant Propel. Rather, it is a road aero frame in the same vein as Scott’s original Foil and Chapter2’s Tere with subtle Kamm tail profiles, a semi-integrated fork crown, and a minimum amount of component integration.

For those riders looking to minimise their aerodynamic drag, it might be tempting to dismiss Vitus for failing to keep pace with the market, but according to the company, the conservative frame design provides a better blend of stiffness and compliance for the rider. At the same time, Vitus wanted to make sure that the bike wouldn’t be affected by crosswinds, so the designers were prepared to give up some marginal gains in order to provide a bike that was well mannered in all conditions.

With that said, I have no data on the real-world performance of the ZX-1, or how it compares with other brands, so buyers can only guess at the aerodynamic performance of the bike. What is clear, though, is that the modest aerodynamic profile of the ZX-1 does not include any integration of components like the stem or seatpost clamp. As a result, there are no special considerations (or complications) when it comes to adjusting the stem or saddle height.

The specifications for the ZX-1 reflect those for the Vitesse EVO, which was once the flagship of Vitus’s road collection. Thus, the frame has a BB386 bottom bracket shell, tapered head tube, internal cable routing, and interchangeable fittings for mechanical and electronic groupsets. The ZX-1 shares the same flat mounts for the brakes and 12mm-diameter thru-axles as the Vitesse EVO Disc, however the new bike can accommodate 140mm and 160mm rotors, front and rear.

The ZX-1 is available in six frame sizes, as detailed in the table below:

Overall, the geometry for the ZX-1 is quite similar to the Vitesse EVO Disc, albeit with less stack for the larger frame sizes, a little more reach, and shorter chainstays. Bottom bracket drop ranges 72-67mm, decreasing as the size of the frame increases, but a 43mm fork rake and 410mm-long chainstays are used throughout the range.

That shared fork rake is a little disappointing, since the smallest frame size really deserves a fork with more rake to provide a more immediate steering response in line with the other frame sizes. This is a common oversight for mass-manufactured frames, which use slacker head tube angles to reduce the amount of toe overlap for small frame sizes.

There are three ZX-1 models in Vitus’s 2018 catalogue, and all feature the same frameset, Shimano groupsets, and mid-to-high-profile wheelsets. The entry-level build features Shimano’s current 105 11-speed mechanical groupset and Mavic Cosmic Elite wheels; the Ultegra build reviewed here has the new R8070 Di2 groupset along with Prime RP-50 carbon clinchers; and the flagship Team build combines Shimano’s mechanical Dura-Ace R9100 groupset with DT Swiss ARC 1100 DiCut carbon clinchers.

Looking more closely at the Ultegra build, the new Di2 groupset includes a semi-compact 52/36T crankset, 11-28T cassette, and a three-port junction box mounted under the stem. The alloy cockpit comprises Ritchey’s WCS 4-Axis stem and Streem II handlebars; for seating, a Fizik Antares saddle is mounted on a proprietary carbon seatpost; and the wheels are fitted with Schwalbe’s Pro One tyres (25c), which are tubeless-ready but fitted with inner tubes from the factory. A stealthy black-on-black finish completes the bike, which looks like a sophisticated and race-ready package.

Total weight for the 54cm bike sent for review was 8.09kg/17.83lb without pedals or bottle cages, which is probably more than what most buyers would hope for a mid-level bike, but it is consistent with other road disc bikes around the same price, such as Giant’s Propel Advanced Pro Disc.

All of Vitus’s bikes are available for online purchase at Wiggle and Chain Reaction Cycles with worldwide delivery. The ZX-1 CR1 Aero Disc sells for AU$5,685/US$4,752/£3,200, however that price does not include delivery, and may not include local tax/duty. For buyers in Australia, delivery will cost AU$195 while tax/duty will add another ~15% to the final cost of the bike, making for a total of at least AU$6,700.

When that price is compared to bikes with similar builds, such as Giant’s Propel Advanced Pro Disc (AU$6,599), Scott’s Foil 10 Disc (AU$6,300), and Merida’s Reacto Disc 8000-E (AU$6,999), then the ZX-1 is no more affordable than its big-brand competition, at least for Australian buyers. By contrast, the ZX-1 is considerably cheaper than the Propel Advanced Pro Disc and the Foil 10 Disc in the UK, plus buyers get free delivery and a 30-day test ride as well.

As with any bike that is boxed for delivery, some assembly of the ZX-1 will be required before it can be ridden. This will normally involve fitting the handlebars to the stem, seatpost to the frame, and the pedals to the cranks. After-sales service from Wiggle and Chain Reaction Cycles is largely limited to returns and refunds, and while some countries have service points, this is not a widespread feature, so buyers will generally need to find a mechanic and pay for any tune-ups and adjustments required once the bike has been delivered.

More information on the ZX-1 can be found on the Vitus web site, while Wiggle and Chain Reaction Cycles can provide information on the options for purchase and delivery.

A bike for undulating terrain and aggressive riding

Carbon fibre construction, Kamm tail tubing, electronic shifting, 50mm carbon rims, disc brakes, and a stealthy finish: if there was ever a recipe for an aggressive race bike, then Vitus has assembled all of the right ingredients with the ZX-1 CR1. And, as it turns out, the final mix makes for a pretty potent race bike that excels in undulating terrain.

The ZX-1 was an easy bike to get to know, and within a couple of rides, I was at home on it. There was plenty of stiffness where it was needed, and overall, it was a stout and robust bike. Every time I put in an effort, out of the saddle or seated, the bike responded nicely, and with a pleasing amount of feedback from the road, I found it a thrill to ride.

The steering of the bike was quite quick, perfect for a race-oriented bike and for attacking sharp turns. I didn’t have any problems with the handling of the bike, either, which was stable at high speeds, yet willing to turn at low speeds. There was some toe overlap, but that was easy to forgive since it was only noticeable during track stands while waiting for traffic lights to change.

The ride quality of the ZX-1 was pretty forgiving — for a race bike. Slamming into a crack or hole at high speeds always produced some noticeable shock, but I wouldn’t describe the bike as harsh. When I tackled a few unpaved tracks and rough chipseal on the ZX-1, the bike was able to soak up a lot of buzz and vibration, but there was a clear threshold where the ZX-1 could be overwhelmed.

To put the ride quality of the ZX-1 into perspective, it falls somewhere in between each generation of Scott’s Foil. The first-generation Foil was exceptionally stiff and exciting to ride, while the second-generation Foil was much more compliant and a better choice for rough roads. Thus, as a bike that is noticeably stiff (and exhilarating to ride) yet still able to tame rough stretches of road, I expect a lot of racers (or aggressive riders) will appreciate (and perhaps savour) what the ZX-1 has to offer.

In this regard, it’s worth noting that I used a tyre pressure of 60psi for most of the review period, which worked well for the 25c Schwalbe Pro One tyres supplied with the bike. I spent a couple of rides using the tyres with inner tubes (as supplied) before swapping them out for tubeless valves (also supplied with the bike) and sealant. It was worth the effort because the tyres went from dull to lively, though the overall impact on the bike was really a matter of nuance.

Over the last couple of years, I’ve been on a number of road disc bikes, and each instance, they never felt quite as agile or responsive as a rim-brake-equipped bike. This was especially noticeable when comparing the rim- and disc-brake versions of Vitus’s Vitesse EVO, where at least some of the difference could be attributed to markedly heavier wheels.

In the case of the ZX-1, this effect wasn’t nearly as noticeable, but it still wasn’t as agile and zippy as a lighter bike with rim brakes. The difference was yet another nuance, to be sure, but it did blunt the performance of the bike, and for some racers, at least, it might feel like an unnecessary handicap.

On the flip side, the quality of braking was superb, near effortless, and confidence-inspiring. The ergonomics of Shimano’s new R8070 Di2 hydraulic levers are much improved and a welcome replacement for the R785 lever. With no obvious bulges in the width or shape of the hoods, they are virtually indistinguishable from a Di2 rim-brake lever. It may have taken a few years, but Shimano has finally managed to seamlessly integrate disc brakes into its Ultegra Di2 groupset.

Heading into the hills, the ZX-1 was a capable performer, but it wasn’t a potent climbing rig. Instead, it was at its best in undulating terrain where the stout chassis was a clear asset when driving the bike over small rises. The ZX-1 always seemed to gather speed quickly on descents; likewise, the bike was reasonably easy to keep going at high speeds on flat roads. On paper, this is where 50mm rims and Kamm tails promise to add an edge to a bike, and if that was the case, then I’m glad I had both at my disposal.

At the same time, the ZX-1 had another edge to offer, which was far more personal: the bike was a very good fit (although I had to remove the headset cover to get the handlebars low enough for my needs) and my weight distribution was nearly perfect. As a result, I was able to achieve an ease with the ZX-1 that I don’t often find, which may have helped my speed; if not, then it certainly elevated my experience and added to my enjoyment of the bike.

Summary and final thoughts

Vitus has done a fantastic job of resurrecting and updating the ZX-1 for the new millennium. The bike looks like an aggressive race bike, and that is exactly how it performs. The ZX-1 stiff and robust with a firm, but forgiving, ride quality that should satisfy any racer. The steering and handling is spot-on, and while the disc-brake hardware adds some weight to the bike, it won’t be much of a handicap on flat courses and undulating terrain where the bike is at its best.

Shoppers within the UK might be particularly tempted with what the ZX-1 has to offer, given the attractive price, easy availability, and even the option for a 30-day test-ride. Outside of the UK, though, delivery and local taxes/duties add significantly to the price of the bike, and buyers must contend with the daunting proposition of spending thousands on a bike that they can’t ride beforehand (or return with ease). That isn’t to say that the bike is overpriced, but it no longer trumps similarly equipped bikes from other brands.

As a result, I expect a lot of shoppers will find it easy to overlook Vitus and the ZX-1 CR1. Nevertheless, it remains a great package that might end up looking quite exotic in a bunch dominated by more recognisable brands.

 

 

Shimano’s new R8070 hydraulic brake lever/Di2 shifter is superb.

 

The ZX-1 is race legal with disc brakes, no less.

Press-fit detractors won’t be happy with the BB386 shell on the Vitus ZX-1, but at least the format places the cartridge bearings far out on the Shimano Hollowtech II spindle.

 

The external Di2 junction box and hydraulic hose connectors are untidy but it’s difficult to see them when sitting on the bike.

Prime is another in-house brand for Wiggle and Chain Reaction Cycles so it’s not surprising to see these wheels on the Vitus ZX-1 CR1.

The new Ultegra disc-brake groupset features RT800 rotors with Freeza cooling blades to help dissipate heat.

 

The hydraulic brake hose adds a little to the width of the R8070 Di2 lever but it’s difficult to notice when holding on to the levers.

 

 

 

 

 

The 25c Schwalbe Pro One tyres supplied with the bike are an easy fit in the fork…

… and in the frame. According to Vitus, the ZX-1 will accommodate 28c tyres, but nothing larger.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The post Vitus ZX-1 CR1 Aero Disc bike review: A classic name reborn appeared first on CyclingTips.

BMC has replaced its existing Teammachine ALR aluminum road racing platform with an all-new frameset designed to more closely mimic the performance, look, and feel of its more expensive Teammachine SLR cousin. Lighter, sleeker, and more comfortable than before, the Teammachine ALR may be dubbed as a “gateway model” for more expensive versions in the BMC lineup, but many buyers will likely call it good right there.

BMC is once again using hydroformed tubing for the Teammachine ALR, although the newly refined triple-butted wall thicknesses help bring the claimed weight down to 1,190g for a painted 54cm rim-brake model — 60g lighter than before. BMC has moved to size-specific tubing this time around, too, for what should be a more consistent ride quality across the size range.

Bike companies often try to get their aluminum frames to mimic the performance of carbon fiber frames in one way or another. In the case of the Teammachine ALR, BMC says the new model is most like the upper-end Teammachines in terms of ride comfort. Bottom bracket and rear triangle stiffness are supposedly nearly identical as well, but the front triangle is said to be 7% less rigid in terms of torsion.

That ride quality should be consistently smooth, too. The dropped seatstay configuration carries over, but the stays are now flattened horizontally, and the proprietary carbon fiber seatpost gains a new D-shaped profile. Combined with the new all-carbon fork, BMC claims the Teammachine ALR’s ride stiffness is now on-par with the Teammachine SLR (which is already widely regarded for its superb comfort).

The new Teammachine ALR is also said to get a boost in efficiency, with rear triangle and bottom bracket stiffness measurements that are supposedly identical to the Teammachine SLR. The carbon frame still is said to have a 7% advantage in front triangle torsional rigidity, however, which may be noticeable when climbing or sprinting out of the saddle, or even when just snaking the bike through faster corners.

Both the down tube and seat tube take on a wide and rounded rectangular profile down by the bottom bracket to keep the frame from swaying under power. Also note how the internally routed cables exit just ahead of the bottom bracket shell.

Other changes include a neatly hidden internal wedge-type seatpost binder, internal cable routing, and the addition of a disc-brake version with flat-mount caliper interfaces and 12mm thru-axles at both ends (claimed weight for the disc-brake frameset is 1,250g). Carrying over from the previous version are the threaded bottom bracket shell and slight head tube extensions relative to the more aggressive Teammachine SLR.

BMC will offer the updated Teammachine ALR in three complete builds: the Teammachine ALR Disc One with Shimano’s hydraulic disc-brake 105 groupset for US$2,200 / €2,000; the Teammachine ALR One with the standard rim-brake Shimano 105 groupset for US$1,600 / €1,500; and the Teammachine ALR Two with Shimano Tiagra for US$1,400 / €1,300. Australian and European Union prices are to be confirmed.

All of the new bikes will begin arriving in shops around September. More information can be found at bmc-switzerland.com.

BMC intends the new Teammachine ALR as a gateway into higher-end models. Claimed frame weight is 1,190g for a 54cm rim-brake model – 60g lighter than the previous version.

Disc brakes place asymmetrical forces on a carbon fiber fork, and one solution to keep the bike tracking straight under braking is to thicken the tube walls. BMC has kept the wall thickness the same on the new Teammachine ALR fork, but instead has increased the cross-section size on that side to stiffen things up.

D-shaped seatposts are becoming increasingly common. As compared to a conventional round shape, the flat trailing edge makes it more likely that the post will flex under load for a smoother and more comfortable ride.

BMC does without a chainstay bridge on the latest Teammachine ALR, apparently feeling that the stays’ large diameter is sufficiently rigid to keep the rear end from wagging under hard pedaling efforts.

Are threaded bottom brackets making a comeback? Granted, the previous version of the BMC Teammachine ALR used a threaded bottom bracket as well, but nevertheless, it’s good to see the practice continued here.

BMC clearly believes in the longevity of two-chainring drivetrains given that the front derailleur mount on the new Teammachine ALR is permanently affixed to the seat tube.

While rim-brake versions of the new BMC Teammachine ALR use conventional quick-release dropouts, the disc-brake version gets 12mm thru-axles at both ends.

The seatstays are relatively slim and flattened to make them more likely to flex under bump loads.

Internal wedge-type seatpost binders are becoming more common on carbon fiber frames, but it’s rare to see them on aluminum ones like the new Teammachine ALR. According to BMC, this arrangement not only looks better, but also effectively lengthens the amount of exposed seatpost for a given saddle height for more flex and comfort.

As compared to the carbon fiber Teammachine SLR 01 and 02 frames, the aluminum Teammachine ALR frame has about 10mm of additional stack for a slightly taller riding position.

Flat-mount disc-brake interfaces are used front and rear, as is essentially standard these days. Weld quality on this early Teammachine ALR sample looks rather lumpy.

The front brake hose is neatly routed through the fork blade, and the entry point is sufficiently far forward that the hose shouldn’t rub on the head tube.

The post Revamped BMC Teammachine ALR promises carbon performance on aluminum budgets appeared first on CyclingTips.