The list was huge and, to be fair, is packed with some real banging discounts.

Shop the Sigma Sports Warehouse Sale.

As Cyclingnews' deal-hunting guru, I've spent several hours sifting through it (so you don't have to), but it quickly became overwhelming, with a ton of items down to the last remnants of stock, and some of it, to be frank, is total garbage.

However, saying the one man's trash is another man's treasure, and who am I to judge if you've been on the hunt for an Oakley Face Mask? Well, the hunt is no longer, because you can relive the COVID-19 days with 97% off and grab it for just 50p. That's a huge £14.50 off the staggering £15 RRP.

After you've picked up one of the best face masks on the market, a new bike might be on your wish list. There are deals across some of the best road bikes and gravel bikes from the likes of Cervelo, Specialized, Trek and more. Including a huge £5,001 off the Cervelo R5 Red XPLR AXS, which is a bike we branded as road bike royalty and awarded a 4.5-star rating.

So the choice is yours, and below you'll find 22 of the best deals, but there are plenty more to be had; you just need to be willing to do some serious sifting.

With it being a clearance, it's the last of the stock, so sizing is limited. We'd say if you see something you're after, then grab it while you can, even if it's that Oakley Face Mask.

Shop the Zwift Big Weekend Sale – Ends September 28.

We are already huge fans of the Zwift Ride and rate it as one of the best smart bikes on the market. Building on the original, the Zwift Ride V2 adds multi-length cranks, expanded saddle adjustability, and a wider-diameter handlebar, making it easy to dial in your perfect fit so you can get riding faster.

These Zwift Ride V2 deals include the Kickr Core 2 and the Cog and Click virtual shifting and gearing system. It now makes what, in our opinion, is the ultimate Zwift experience even more affordable than ever. So whether you're starting indoor riding for the first time or upgrading your current setup, the always-ready Ride is the smart bike setup of choice, designed specifically for Zwift.

Below you'll find the region-specific deals. At this price, they are sure to be popular. Like all the best cycling deals, they are only available while stocks last or until the Zwift Big Weekend Sale ends on September 28.

Zwift Big Weekend Sale deals

In our original Zwift Ride Smart Frame review, we awarded it an impressive 4.5-star rating and considered it a significant step forward for indoor cycling. Highlights include a real ride feel, quiet and customizable virtual gear shifting, and full control of Zwift from your handlebars.

However, as Josh Croxton, Cyclingnews' Associate Editor, noted, it wasn't without its flaws. Questions at the time around the software, handlebar fit, and the fixed cranks meant it missed out on that perfect score.

As if by magic, Zwift has dropped the new V2 and addressed these shortcomings. The V2 model now has multi-length crank arms as standard, so riders can choose between 160, 165, 170, 172.5, and 175mm crank arms. That means the new compact frame will now also accommodate riders from 4'10 to 6'6.

Elsewhere, new additions include an updated seatpost design for more fore-aft adjustability and an overall minor cosmetic update, including a new head tube badge at the front of the bike featuring the Zwift squirrel logo.

The handlebars now have a larger diameter and an oversized, flatter top section designed to give you a wider, more ergonomic surface to rest your hands on.

This October, the Zwift Companion app will also get a fresh new look. Major updates to the home screen will simplify the experience, bringing ride stats front and centre.

Zwift is also set to further expand Watopia, the most popular destination in indoor cycling. Inspired by the West Coast of California and Catalina Island, this expansion adds roughly 18 kilometres of new roads and two crit-style circuits designed specifically for racing.

After months of rumours, a new Dura-Ace groupset finally surfaced at the Vuelta a España last month. More than one of the Alpecin-Premier Tech team's Canyon Aeroad CFR bikes were fitted with the new equipment.

Not much else has been seen of the new groupset since the Vuelta, but Van der Poel himself seems to be testing it publicly now. The Dutchman used it to take two stage wins at the recent Tour de Luxembourg, including his incredible 174-kilometre solo breakaway.

Riders took to the Montreal Worlds circuit yesterday to complete training laps, and photos from the recon time showed Van der Poel riding his Canyon Aeroad with at least the new unreleased shifters fitted to his bike.

We wouldn't be completely surprised if more than one rider's bike is fitted with the new equipment for the weekend's races. Dura-Ace is a groupset designed for racing, and testing it in anger will likely be useful during what we can only assume are its final phases of development before a launch next year.

If you are watching online, the easiest way to tell the shifters apart currently is the lack of any Dura-Ace logos and the more prominent inside shifter buttons.

Van der Poel also reportedly played a key role in developing the new Dura-Ace wheels, which launched in July. Shimano followed these up with a new pedal, shoe and cleat launch last week, which included the new R9300 Dura-Ace pedals that were first spotted way back in April at Paris-Roubaix.

Whilst we don't have any official information, Van der Poel's testing likely creates useful feedback to help refine the groupset, which seems to still be in a testing phase. Don't be surprised if one or two things change before its official launch.

But importantly, Van der Poel used only elements of the groupset at his last race appearance, which perhaps indicates that a complete groupset, which we know will be 13-speed, isn't ready to roll out just yet.

Notably, the Dutchman wasn't using the chainset; the component that drew the most criticism online from Shimano fans.

At the Tour de Luxembourg, he raced on a bike fitted with the new Dura-Ace shifters, which have the new 'bonus button' shifters on the inside of each brake hood, and the new Dura-Ace rear mech, which looks like it's going to remain a wired electronic unit.

But he didn't use the prototype crankset we saw at the Vuelta. The new unit seemed to leave fans underwhelmed online due to its aesthetics; the hollow forged chainrings weren't in use, and the connection between the crank arm and the rings seemed unfinished.

As we speculated in that first story, this adds weight to the theory that the new chainset could still be in development, with further revisions coming.

Unsurprisingly, when asked, Shimano declined to divulge any specific information on Van der Poel's recent usage, saying "Shimano is constantly developing new products, but does not comment on rumours, speculation, or unannounced products."

Van der Poel has played down his chances of taking a second World Road Race title on Sunday, but he's a rider who will always give 100%. A win on Sunday won't tell us much about Shimano's new equipment, but his decision to use it at all suggests we're edging ever closer to its launch.

Gone are the days of bolting your back wheel to your trainer and staring at your garage wall; modern indoor training is engaging and interactive and offers the chance to race and ride with others around the globe. If you can’t find any real people to ride with, you can co-opt a group of pacers to ride with you.

Allied to this is the increased affordability of the best smart trainers, which can work with an indoor cycling app to vary how hard the ride is, link to other hardware and record your stats to pour over post-ride. We’ll run through the indoor training hardware options and explain their pros and cons.

Why have smart trainers taken over?

The major advantage of a smart trainer over a ‘dumb’ trainer is that a smart trainer will connect to other devices and indoor training apps, whereas a dumb trainer acts essentially independently and requires you to change the resistance manually.

It can still be used with a training app, but the experience isn’t as smooth and won’t follow the contours of a route precisely.

A smart trainer will automatically vary the resistance that you pedal against, so when the app says you’re climbing, pedalling will get harder and when you go downhill, it will ease up – it’s a much more realistic experience.

A smart trainer will measure your power output and pedalling cadence too, so you’ll have stats on your performance during a workout.

Unlike a dumb trainer, a smart trainer can also vary resistance automatically as you ride, to ensure a consistent power output. Called ERG mode, this is great for ensuring that you stay in your desired training zone and for following intervals.

The price of smart trainers has dropped significantly too, so you can pick up a basic model for little more than the price you’d have paid for a non-smart trainer a few years ago.

And why are most trainers now wheel-off?

Alongside the shift to smart trainers, the majority of trainers are now wheel off, also called direct drive.

In a direct drive trainer, your bike’s rear dropouts are anchored to the trainer and the chain passes over a cassette mounted to the trainer. In contrast, while a wheel-on trainer is also clamped at its dropouts, the wheel engages with a roller on the trainer to turn the trainer’s flywheel and resistance unit.

A direct drive trainer avoids wear on your tyre – wheel-on trainers need a specific trainer tyre if used a lot, which is made of a harder-wearing rubber. It also avoids slippage under harder efforts and offers a more realistic ride feel.

Wheel-on dumb trainers do have their place though; in general, they’re more portable than direct drive trainers and so are good to take to events and races for warm-ups. Setting up is less messy than a direct drive trainer too, as you don’t have to fiddle with the chain and derailleur.

What other indoor training hardware options are there?

Another option to consider alongside a smart trainer is a set of rollers. They’re tricky to get used to, as your bike isn’t supported. That’s good for your balance – the risk of falling off the side is an incentive to pedal smoothly, although many rollers have a parabolic shape or a lip that helps keep you centred and lowers the risk of falling off.

Although many rollers don’t have smart features, the Elite Nero, for example, does offer automatic resistance variation and so can be used with indoor apps.

The Wahoo Kickr Rollr trainer avoids the falling off problem by holding your front wheel in place. It will vary resistance automatically and measures your approximate power output, although for more accuracy you’ll need a separate on-bike power meter.

Rollers have the additional advantage that they’re quick to set up, as you don’t need to clamp the frame or remove your rear wheel, again making them a good pre-race warm-up option. Feedback Sports’ Omnium rollers are even more compact and portable, but do require removal of the front wheel.

The deluxe option is a smart bike. This incorporates the smart trainer into a complete indoor exercise bike. If you have a dedicated indoor training space/gym, a smart bike avoids having to take your outdoor bike indoors and fiddle with the wheels before each ride. Smart bikes are, in general, large and heavy though, so you won’t want to move one around much. They’re also expensive.

The exception is the Zwift Ride smart frame. This is a dedicated indoor bike that hooks onto a standard smart trainer. It’s more affordable than other smart bikes, but ties you into the Zwift ecosystem, although it now works with Rouvy too. It can be bought with a Kickr Core 2 trainer for a complete indoor bike, or can be used with a range of other trainers, although not all trainers are compatible.

The Zwift Ride V2 was launched in Autumn 2026 and has more adjustability built in, including variable crank lengths.

What is Zwift Cog and Click?

Another option to consider is the Zwift Cog and Click system. Again, this works with Zwift and Rouvy only, but offers a simpler set-up, with a single sprocket in the orange cassette. This works with the Zwift Click controllers to provide virtual shifting, so there’s no need to use your bike’s derailleurs; it’s faster and quieter too.

The pair of Click controllers are fixed to your handlebars and allow you to control virtual shifting. They offer additional buttons that you can use to control the Zwift app from your bars too.

Zwift Cog and Click tie you into using the Zwift and Rouvy apps, but there’s a wide range of direct drive trainers that are now sold with the system or are marketed as Zwift Ready with an orange tag on packaging.

iGPSPORT's competitively priced bike computers have made me sit up and take notice this year.

iGPSPORT was founded in 2012, and its products are now available worldwide. It caught my attention earlier this year when it began sponsoring the FDJ WorldTour team.

I reported on that news at the time, as a pair of Chinese computer brands entered the top flight in the form of iGPSPORT with FDJ and Magene with Astana.

Like various other sectors, such as the automotive and coffee industry, this is another strong example of Chinese products challenging established Western brands.

I called in the BiNavi unit to test and to see if the performance, along with the price, justifies a seat at the big table alongside the likes of Garmin, Wahoo and Hammerhead in our best bike computers guide.

The BiNavi retails for £219.90 / $239.90 / €239 and possesses a spec list that on paper takes the fight to the big manufacturers.

The unit sits amongst the ‘bike navigator’ section of the brand’s computer offerings, alongside the six-unit-strong ‘GPS computer’ section. The Bi Navi units just place a little more emphasis on navigation.

There’s a colour touchscreen, app, 32GB memory, claimed 35+ hour battery life, certainly everything the average rider and this tech writer wants in a unit.

I’ve used it exclusively for several months and for the odd hill climb event. I’ve been impressed and won over; this review will be enough to help you leap to an unfamiliar system if you like the look of the unit and the price tag

Design and aesthetic

The BiNavi arrives in a neat box, and the standalone unit comes with a charger cable, tether, O-rings for mounting to a bar or stem, and something I’ve never seen before in a bike computer: a silicone case and screen protector to install to keep the screen looking fresh,

The brand also offers a BiNavi Air unit, which you might spot. It has a slightly smaller screen and costs a little less, but has a similar spec list.

The unit has six buttons and, size-wise, is roughly the same as the Hammerhead Karoo; official dimensions are 101×60×14.5 mm. There’s a picture comparison with a few units below for you to look at.

In terms of specifications, the BiNavi on paper at least is pretty much up there with various premium smart computers on the market, and it makes a strong opening case for the amount it costs. The full spec list is here, but the unit has a 3.5" colour touchscreen, a claimed 35-hour battery life, 32GB of memory, USB-C charging, an IPX7 waterproof rating and supports dual-band GNSS GPS.

In terms of additional desirable add-ons, there's music control, smart notification updates, Komoot, TrainingPeaks, and Strava integration, along with DJI, Insta360, Aerosensor and Tymewear, etc.

There's also training support, and the unit provides training analysis and training plans if you want to try and tackle more structured work.

This is the brand's navigation-focused unit, but its nav capabilities are on a par with a range of other smart computers. Routes can be planned or created from rides in the app and sent to the device; POI navigation can also be used, and you can see and access other local routes created by iGPSPORT users in the recommended route section.

Voice navigation for turns is also an option as long as you are connected to the app, and you can choose to have Chris Froome's (a global brand ambassador) voice as an option via your phone speaker/headphones, which I obviously tested out. You can have the multiple Grand Tour winner as your SatNav man/lady, it's a fun feature.

iGPSPORT has an app, and this is used alongside the unit using Bluetooth, just as you would with Garmin Connect or apps from any other brand. Activities are stored in the app, and routes can be transferred across to the BiNavi unit

The unit takes about two seconds to power up, and once on, you are met with the main home screen; 12 widgets take up the sreen from navigation, training, group riding, and weather, etc. Along the top is where you can select your ride profile screen; there are seven stock options for you to customise and set up. I've used two of them: one for my general road riding with lap screens, etc., and a pared-down race version.

There are two theme options to choose from, which dictate the layout of the computer (pictured below). I found the ‘dynamic widgets’ option a lot better than the ‘colourful cards’; it would be my recommendation and is a bit more like your average smartphone layout.

Slide down from the top on any screen, and a kind of settings screen comes up; from here you can toggle screen brightness using a slider bar, access your sensors and pairings, check the weather, etc.

Operating the unit and using the touchscreen to scroll through pages is very easy; the touchscreen is great and works perfectly, but the unit is very fast too; there’s no waiting for it to do anything. It’s great to use.

Performance

So, is it any good, and is it worth spending your money on? I would say yes, absolutely, but there are a couple of points to consider.

I’m well over 700 miles into my testing period with the BiNavi now and have been very impressed with the unit. I’ve used it for all my riding and training and a local hill climb.

It’s easy to use and generally very fast; the touchscreen is great, it charges quickly, and it does everything I need it to. There isn’t much to not like about it; I’ve bumped into two riders locally recently who use iGPSPORT units too, and they are converts.

My very first impression was that the screen wasn’t as bright or vivid as the other well-known units on the market. It’s more than fine, and I adapted within days, but it's just not as bright.

I found it easy to set up my pages, adjust them on the fly and set up a new one for a hill climb where I just wanted power and time on the screen for the short, all-out effort. It’s on a par with the Karoo for how easy it is to customise ride screens.

One detail I really like is the speed at which laps can be executed, and the lap ‘interval start’ screen is removed from the display; hit the lap button; the message comes up on screen; simply touch the screen to remove it, and it’s gone straight away.

I’ve found this a really agreeable feature in training. Don’t forget the unit is also compatible with TrainingPeaks, so your sessions can be uploaded to the platform straight away as well.

Battery life is quoted at 35 hours, though the brand says it will, of course, depend on your own use case. For my roughly 8-ish hours a week of riding, I haven’t come close to being caught out by a low battery; I've also found charging to be very fast. It will start to get used up quicker with all sorts connected and navigation on, but it will be fine for pretty long rides.

I've had a couple of ride upload issues to Strava where the device seemed to get the date wrong; rides I completed on a Monday came out as being done on a Sunday at a different time. I couldn't figure this out, and it seemed to be a glitch.

Navigation is generally good using the BiNavi, and I like the clear map layout, even preferring it to the Garmin format, I think. The device gives you turning warnings in advance, and you can customise nav screen metrics like speed and power.

There are a few points on navigation worth mentioning; the first thing that caught me out was that you can't use the touchscreen to zoom in on the map; instead, you have to use the + and - buttons on the screen.

The device froze on me once whilst calculating a route start; I was struggling for a few minutes before finding that hitting the power button sorted it out. Niggles can happen on any device, and it was isolated.

You can also only use the iClimb climbing metric feature whilst riding a pre-loaded route; again, no biggie, but it's not as comprehensive as something like Wahoo Summit can provide climbing metrics for every climb you ride.

You can navigate a pre-ridden route from the device, but you will need the app to save a route and send it across to your unit. It’s done in seconds, though.

I didn't find the one-click navigation function amazing in the app either; this is where you can search for a location and route to it. A simple search for a McDonald's (we've all been there) would only throw up one 100 miles away (there's one three miles from my house), but the unit located the nearby cycling track successfully, for example. The system seems slightly hit-and-miss and could be an issue on a bleak winter ride for some riders.

Verdict

At £219.90 / $239.90 / €239, this computer offers fantastic value for money; it’s on a par with units twice its value, and personally I’d take it over the Garmin Edge 550 due to that excellent touchscreen and save myself some cash.

The screen isn’t as vivid and bright; that’s it. I quickly got used to that though, and it’s not an issue.

Some of the navigation and UI performance from the unit and/or app seems slightly subpar, but for the price and overall performance, it doesn't bother me too much.

Verdict

For the amount of money it costs, I think this is a really solid computer unit from iGPSPORT. It's very fast and easy to use; the touchscreen is good, and it does all I need it to for my riding.

The map quality and navigation itself are good, and if you don't make new routes several times a week and really ask a lot of your computer's navigation tech, I don't think you will have much to worry about. If you're the sort of rider that generally knows your routes off by heart, and every so often downloads a GPX route for an event, you will be laughing.

At final count: over 800 miles of riding have properly tested the BiNavi. Some aspects of the overall system and app are slightly clunkier and less refined than some competitors in places, but there isn't too much in it.

Excellent performance at a very attractive price point; what's not to like. iGPSPORT deserves a seat at the big table.

I recently reviewed the Kärcher OC3 Foldable Mobile Cleaner and absolutely loved the compact portability of this wonderful low-pressure washer, which makes it one of the best pressure washers for bikes. As much as I rated the Kärcher highly, it did have limitations in pressure and reservoir capacity.

So, if mobile washing is a priority and you want some extra grunt for cleaning power, the Muc-Off Mobile Pressure Washer is worthy of your attention. However, there is a major flaw that turns what is a brilliant bit of kit into something less impressive, and some may consider it a deal-breaker.

The Muc-Off Mobile Pressure Washer launched back in 2024 as an upgrade and mobile variant of the brand’s mains-powered bicycle pressure washer. The unit features a self-contained 20-litre water tank, its own internal power source, a max pressure of 45 bar (approx. 652 PSI), and a rapid four-litre-per-minute flow rate. Impressive stats, and as a Muc-Off fan, I was keen to test it out.

Design and aesthetics 

Firstly, the Muc-Off Mobile Pressure Washer is very easy on the eye. Dressed in the brand's signature style with a sleek black-and-subtle-pink colourway, it really stands out, especially if you ever find yourself in a car park pressure washer standoff.

It is constructed primarily from high-grade, heavy-duty plastics, resulting in a solid build designed to withstand being bounced around in car boots, dragged across gravel, and exposed to the elements.

Considering it houses a 20-litre tank, it’s fairly compact. Its squat shape makes it resistant to tipping, but not impossible. The sturdy wheels, a basic towing handle, and a robust carry handle make it easy to manoeuvre even when fully loaded.

Muc-Off includes four lances with this basic Starter Bundle: a lower-pressure bike lance, an adjustable lance, a full-power motorbike lance, and a snow foam lance. The box also includes a bottle of Muc-Off bike cleaner.

The unit is driven by a 500W electric motor powered by a 40V lithium battery. This setup claims to offer 15 to 24 minutes of runtime depending on your selected mode (Boost or Eco) and recharges fully in three to four hours. The motor, internal pump, and water-sealed battery compartment are all safely contained inside, with a dedicated watertight door making the battery easy to remove.

The hose is a generous five meters long. While longer hoses always have tangle potential, not being tethered to a mains power cable makes this less of an issue, and the extra reach lets you move freely around your bike without constantly dragging the unit along.

This brings me to a curious design flaw.

The main lid isn't watertight. While this makes filling simple, but placing a full tank in your car or van means water will inevitably slosh out while driving. For me, this isn't a deal-breaker because I wouldn't transport a full tank anyway; doing so adds considerable weight and risks dumping 20 litres of water into my boot if the washer ever tipped over.

Muc-Off officially advises against travelling with a full reservoir. They even sell a separate 20-litre Water Tank for transport, though buying extra kit somewhat defeats the point of an all-in-one system. They also offer a waterproof Dry Bag Mobile Holdall to catch leaks and suggest filling the main tank no more than a quarter full if you absolutely must travel with water inside.

Empty, the unit weighs 7.7 kg (17 lbs). Filled to its 20-litre capacity, it tips the scales at a hefty 27.7 kg (61 lbs), a significant weight to haul around, particularly given the lack of a watertight seal.

Performance

Having owned several mains-powered, high-pressure washers, I was expecting big things from the Muc-Off and its power numbers, and it doesn’t disappoint. Thanks to a self-priming function, water pressure is instant the moment you pull the trigger, packing enough kick at full power to lift the lance if you're holding it one-handed.

I used the full-power nozzle on my bike’s tyres and gave the frame a general blast to shift the bulk of the muck. Just be cautious around sensitive areas like bearings and bottom brackets, as this unit will force water past bearing seals without a doubt.

The Snow Foam Lance is brilliant, quickly coating your ride in a thick blanket of Muc-Off Nano Cleaner or your preferred bike wash. Once the foam has worked its magic, you can switch to either the adjustable power lance or the full-power version for rinsing. I stuck mostly to full power, but the adjustable option is great if you want to dial back the force around delicate components, even if it's slightly less effective on stubborn dirt. The motorcycle lance packs the heaviest hit, and I used it on my bike with no problems; it's not advised, but useful for multi-purpose use.

Muc-Off claims a continuous battery runtime of 15 minutes in Boost mode and 24 minutes in Eco, plenty of time for a thorough clean. I found this accurate in testing, easily emptying the entire water tank well before showing any sign of battery drain. The unit also features a clear charge indicator displaying your remaining battery level.

The hose and lances are well-engineered, locking together with a satisfying click. While the hose feels quite long, perhaps slightly excessively so, it is robust and durable. When empty, everything stores neatly inside the unit, keeping all your accessories organised in one place.

Storage is another important factor to consider. Dimensions come in at 39 cm (15.3 inches) high, 32 cm (12.6 inches) wide and 43 cm (16.9 inches) long. Living in a first-floor flat makes storing and carrying the unit downstairs a bit of a slog when full, but certainly not impossible.

However, if you have a garage, shed, or nearby outdoor tap, or plan to use it exclusively for car park washdowns, this won't be a major issue. If you're using it at home, then having it filled, charged and ready to go works great and allows for a swift clean-down post-ride.

Returning to the washer's lid, it has to be mentioned and impacts overall scoring. If you want to transport the washer and water, your options are to either buy extra water-carrying accessories or use a waterproof bag (which doesn't really fix the root problem). Without a proper seal, water will spill while driving.

So the word mobile could be slightly misleading; it's definitely mobile, but just not as a water-filled mobile unit. Saying that, the convenience is no doubt a plus for use at home, meaning no hooking up hoses and running power from a mains supply.

Finally, like most portable washers, hot water is not recommended. I used lukewarm water for extra cleaning power, staying well within its maximum rated temperature of 40°C (104°F).

The power is impressive, but this level of output also makes the unit fairly noisy, sounding much closer to a full-sized mains pressure washer than quieter, low-pressure units like the Kärcher OC3.

Value

The Mobile Pressure Washer Starter Bundle is currently priced at £250 on the Muc-Off website. I think it offers decent performance for the price. However, considering you can buy a mains-powered unit like the Kärcher K2 Classic, which offers higher pressure, for just £75, it's something to weigh up.

Of course, traditional pressure washers require an outdoor tap, hose, and power outlet, none of which I have outdoors. If your requirements demand a punchy cleaner with built-in power and water storage, the investment is well worth it.

By contrast, the Kärcher OC3 Foldable is a fantastic low-pressure option. While it offers less power and water capacity, it is highly recommended for basic washdowns and is priced at just over £100.

Verdict

Overall, the Mobile Pressure Washer is really good; I enjoyed using it, and it performs brilliantly. The elephant in the room is that non-watertight lid, but is it actually a deal-breaker? If you don't fill the tank prior to transport, or if you don't travel with it at all and simply need all-in-one functionality, it's just no issue whatsoever.

However, if you do attempt to transport it full, prepare for a wet vehicle if you don't transport your water in a separate container. As far as cleaning power goes, it's right up there and does a great job of shifting stubborn dirt, especially on gravel and mountain bikes. It's arguably a bit overkill for a road bike, but it doubles up well as a general-purpose power washer – I've even used it to wash my car.

Ultimately, if it fits your specific setup, I have no hesitation in recommending the Muc-Off Mobile Pressure Washer. It has the lid design flaw and comes with a premium price tag, but it looks cool and performs brilliantly.

Gravel racing was nothing more than a flannel-coated subsection of cyclo-cross with a side order of IPA, and the concept of 'optimisation' was derided by all involved, for it was "against the 'spirit of gravel'".

Returning to the present time, the only spirit is the ghost of that former sport, which has been killed off in favour of aero tubes, deep wheels, wide tyres, skinsuits and maximised carb intakes.

Money talks, so as prize money has grown, competition has become more intense, average speeds have rocketed, and the sport's laissez-faire approach has all but been replaced with a performance engineering mindset.

Nothing evidences modern gravel racing as clearly as the cohort of aero gravel wheels that have launched in the past few years.

It's well known that wider tyres roll more smoothly over rough terrain, but chunky tyres are naturally less aerodynamic; largely by dint of simply being bigger. So designers face the paradox of making gravel wheels that can house as wide a tyre as possible, while also trying to make them as aerodynamic as possible. Oh, and don't make them too heavy either! I don't envy their task.

The result is wheels like Zipp's 303 XPLR SW, Enve's G SES 6.7 and Black Inc's Sixty Four Gravel. All are as deep as their roadgoing counterparts, but designed to house what are essentially - and often literally - mountain bike tyres.

But which of those – and the others listed below – is winning the technical arms race? To find out, we headed to our second home: the wind tunnel.

Wheelsets tested

We tested eight of the most race-focussed wheelsets we could get our hands on, all of which centre around wide internal rim beds, optimisation for wider tyres, and deep profiles.

The list, and accompanying gallery, is as follows:

• Black Inc Sixty Four Gravel
• Cadex Max GXR
• Enve G SES Pro 6.7
• Gulo Composites GGA 44
• Hunt 5AM Gravel
• Roval Terra Aero CLX
• Scribe Gravel Ultra Berd
• Zipp 303 XPLR SW

Protocols and standardisations

As with our previous aero testing, we used the renowned cycling wind tunnel at Silverstone Sports Engineering Hub. Alongside aerodynamic drag calculations, we also weighed each wheelset, and measured the tyre widths to complement the aero data.

For the aero testing, every wheelset was mounted to the exact same gravel bike: the new, slightly wild-looking Factor Elara. We selected the Elara for two reasons: Firstly, the simple one is that we were already taking the bike with us on the day to test its own aero credentials. You can see how it did in our Factor Elara wind tunnel results write-up. Secondly, it made sense as it is the most unashamedly high-performance aero gravel race bike to launch this year. If any bike was a fitting mule for these hyper aero wheels, it was this. And no, Factor didn't pay me to say any of that.

To keep our data as precise as possible, we opted for a bike-only configuration rather than using a live rider. The variance in human body movement during a test sweep introduces a margin of error larger than the wattage differences expected between top-tier wheelsets. Removing the rider from the equation allows us to confidently attribute any performance deltas strictly to the wheels themselves.

To quantify our error margin on the day, which was also spent testing road and gravel bikes against our baseline Trek Emonda, we ran said baseline through a series of repeated runs, some at the start of the day, then more at the end.

In this case, the confidence margin we found was a CdA of 0.0004, or 0.2 watts at 35km/h.

To explain this with an example: If two tests of an identical setup measure differently, and said delta is 0.2 watts, then our confidence in the accuracy of any of the other tests cannot be any better than +/- 0.2 watts. And thus, if one wheelset measures at 99.8 watts, and another is 100.2 watts, they are statistically equal.

Testing was conducted at a wind speed of 35km/h, with the tunnel’s powered rollers spinning the wheels at the same speed. The crankset was fixed in a horizontal position with the driveside arm forward for all tests, with a small velcro strap holding the non-driveside crank arm in place on the nearby chainstay.

Every wheelset was fitted with the exact same pair of Vittoria Terreno Dry 55mm (2.2in) tyres, and we were careful to maintain the same front and rear orientation when swapping from wheelset to wheelset, to eliminate differences in manufacturing tolerances between individual tyres.

Brake rotors were removed and a SRAM Red cassette were transferred between wheelsets too, to avoid any potential unwanted interference on the results there.

All other things were kept identical, including the gear the bike was put into, the bottles on the bike, and even the pressure in the tyres (which was set to the recommendation provided by the SRAM Tyre Pressure calculator, which fluctuated slightly based on the internal width of the wheel).

Yaw sweeps and data capture

We tested each wheelset across seven distinct yaw angles: -15°, -10°, -5°, 0°, +5°, +10°, and +15°. For an idea of what that looks like, check out my High School Art Project above, aka the GIF of a bike transitioning between each yaw point.

Data was measured using 15-second static captures at each yaw point, and the sweep was always done in the same direction (negative to positive yaw) to maintain maximum repeatability.

Caveats

There are a few caveats to throw into the mix before we get into the results.

Firstly, Black Inc. is owned by Factor, and so there's a possibility they were advantaged by our decision to test using the Factor Elara bike, as the two may have been designed in conjunction with each another. There's no knowing to what extent, if at all, this affected the results, and it is an issue we would have run into had we used a Crux (with Rovals) or a Revolt (with Cadex wheels).

Secondly, by testing without a rider on the bike, we aren't giving an accurate real-world representation of how the wheels will be challenged in their actual use. Both Specialized and Giant, for example, design and validate their with a pedalling-leg mannequin, and that when the turbulent air of a rider's legs is introduced, it's likely that their comparative performances will improve. The performance of the Tarmac SL8 in our road bike wind tunnel testing adds weight to this claim; without a rider it's mid-table, but with a rider aboard, it climbs to a much higher place in our rankings.

Thirdly, aero data should only be a small part of your buying decision when it comes to choosing the right wheels for you. Weight, price, build quality, customer service and many other factors are important too.

Results

To get the results below, for each bike I averaged out the datapoints from each of the seven yaw angles.

In calculating those averages, I applied weightings in line with the 2018 research paper by Nathan Barry - A New Method for Analysing the Effect of Environmental Wind on Real World Aerodynamic Performance in Cycling - which weights each yaw angles to better reflect how often you'll experience it in real-world riding scenarios.

That average is then used to calculate the power required to overcome the aerodynamic drag.

Given we're measuring a bike without a rider, the actual wattages shown will be lower than you'll be used to seeing on your head unit, but remember it's the differences between each wheelset that we're interested in here, not the absolute values.

Ahead of publishing this writeup, I shared the data with each brand and gave them the opportunity to comment on the results. I will stitch in their comments below as naturally as I can.

Getting straight into the results, the fastest wheels on test were the Black Inc. Sixty Four Gravel, which come in at $2,399.00 / £2,199.00. They boast a 30mm internal width, a 40.25mm external width, a hooked bead, and as the name suggests, a 64mm deep rim profile.

This is followed closely by the Enve G SES Pro 6.7, which boasts the widest internal diameter here at 35mm. They use a hookless bead, like the Zipp and Hunt wheels below, and claim an external width of 42.6mm. The rear wheel is the deepest on test at 67mm, although the front is a smidge shallower at 60mm. At $3,100.00 / £3,500.00 for a pair, they're among the spendiest here too.

In third place is a product that's yet to be released from British brand Hunt, but which we were given exclusive early access to test, and I've been given explicit pre-embargo permission to tell the Cyclingnews subscribers about. They're called the Hunt 5AM Gravel, or 5AMG for short. They are a 'reverse mullet' wheelset, with a 54mm front wheel and 49mm rear. They offer a 27mm internal width, with a hookless bead, and the front wheel boasts a chunky 45mm external width to help the airflow off the front tyre. I don't yet have prices on these.

Hunt's aero expert, Paddy Brown, who kindly loaned both their own wheels and the Zipp wheels to us for the test, said "we’re incredibly proud of how the 5AMG Ti_UD performed in this test. To come out near the top aerodynamically while also being one of the lightest wheelsets tested is a strong validation of the development work that has gone into this platform. The very wide front rim profile delivers real aerodynamic efficiency, while the Aero Mullet concept continues to prove its value beyond the road and into gravel."

Speaking of aero mullets, interestingly, Hunt and Roval – the Terra Aero CLX – landed the exact same result. They were separated by just one one-thousandth of a watt, but given our error margin is two-tenths, they're all but equal.

The Terra Aero CLX also offers a 27mm internal width with this reverse mullet concept, but Specialized introduces a 'chopped aero' design which squares off the trailing edge of the front rim, claiming equal aero performance to a deeper wheel, but with much less weight. The external width is also much smaller, at 38.5mm (38.4mm for the rear). Priced at $3,398.00 / £2,998.00, these are up there with the Enve and Cadex on price.

Below this comes Zipp, still only 1.9 watts behind the Black Inc wheels, with the the 303 XPLR SW – the wheelset that I think it's safe to say kicked off this whole aero wide gravel wheel game – with their 54mm depth, 32mm internal rim width (hookless), and 40mm external width. At $2,200.00 / £1,600.00, their price is relatively good in this company, and given they're a couple of years old now, it's not too difficult to find them on offer either.

Next up comes Cadex, with the Max GXR, which aren't quite as deep as the above counterparts, but still peddle the aero and wide marketing speak, despite a comparatively narrow 25mm internal width and 35mm external width. Their weight is impressive, as we'll get to below, but their $4,000.00 / £3,500.00 price tag is the spiciest here.

Bringing up the rear are a couple of wheels that have a different purpose. Their marketing isn't centred on being aero, but vibration absorbent.

First up, the Scribe Gravel Ultras are laced with Berd's polymer spokes, which are essentially string but possess an insane strength to weight ratio, while remaining flexy enough to swallow some of the bumps you feel on the road. Their 30mm internal width is among the widest even here, but the use of a hooked bead will perhaps swing the odds in their favour among some buyers. At $1,999.00 / £1,449.00, they're also the most affordable on test.

And finally, the Gulo GGA 44 also offers a hooked 30mm internal rim, but rather than using third-party Berd spokes, they come with a proprietary carbon spoke designed by Gulo itself. At $2,345.00 (approx £1,750.00, based on a currency conversion, but they're not sold in the UK), they're reasonably priced in this company, but neither their wind tunnel result nor their weight (seen below) will win them any custom.

Weight

Looking at the comparative weights of each wheelset, there's a fairly clear inversion of the results above. The more aero a wheelset is, the heavier it tends to be. Zipp and Gulo are slight outliers here, with their aero deficits not being made up on the scales.

Elsewhere, choosing between Roval and Hunt remains a difficult task, and Cadex shines as the potential hillclimber's wheelset.

Width

Despite our Terreno Dry tyres being labeled as 55mm, on all of the wheels here, they blew up to less than 55mm when measured on our calipers.

A slight admission to this section is that we didn't remember to measure all of them (no conspiracy here, just a busy day and things sometimes get missed). I almost didn't include it as a result, but I decided to just share what we had, so those we did get are listed below. The widest was the Enve wheel, at 54.9mm, whereas the narrowest was 51.0mm, courtesy of the Cadex wheels. Naturally, there's a bit of correlation between the rim width and the tyre width.

Conclusions and takeaways

My first takeaway here is that there are definitely aero savings to be had in gravel, as we found in our gravel bike aero test, even with chunky 55mm rubber. That big tyre isn't ruining all the aerodynamic intentions of the wheels, and there's a strong correlation between wheel depth and aero performance. It's always reassuring to know these brands know what they're doing!

I'm aware not all of us will be riding at average speeds of 35km/h (I know I won't be at my current fitness), but for the points in races that matter, such as chasing back onto a group after a crash (ask me how I know), or bridging up to a breakaway where speeds are likely above your all-day average, there are aero savings to be taken advantage of.

But weight is still important. The way Specialized marketed the Crux 5 was notable – and logical to my mind. It said that aero is important, but given rolling resistance matters significantly more in gravel than it does on the road, and that rolling resistance scales with mass, weight should factor more heavily in a consumer's buying decisions for gravel than it does on the road.

Also… I don't know about your local gravel races but all of the ones I've done have been really damn hilly!

As a result, although the big hitters from Black Inc and Enve sit at the top of the table as the most aero on test, don't discount the Roval and Hunt wheels. They sit in a nice sweetspot that trades a watt of aero drag for around 350g of mass. How that equates to speed depends on the course you're riding, and your power output (because more power = more speed = a higher relative importance of aerodynamics).

One of the biggest takeaways for me, though, is that the gap between the aero wheels and the two 'comfort' focussed wheels is only around five watts. If you're racing flat gravel time trials, go all-in on aero, but if your usual gravel routes or race courses are bumpier, slower, and/or you'll spend your time riding in the relative shelter of a group, the lack of a big aero deficit in this dataset could actually sway you away from the Enve or Black Inc wheels in favour of the bump-smoothing comfort of Gulo or Scribe.

The one datapoint we don't have, however, is rolling resistance. Would a Berd spoke actually save more than five watts over rough ground or not? Or would the wider measured width of the tyre on the Enve wheels offset this? These are all things a wind tunnel won't tell you.

Still, I hope the data the wind tunnel can tell you – i.e., all that's written above – is useful. Thanks as ever for reading.

Read more from Cyclingnews Labs

• Wind tunnel tested: The Enve Melee v2 ditches versatility in pursuit of race-day speed, but has it worked?
• Fastest frame, fastest wheels, and a potential 22-watt upgrade: The Factor Elara wind tunnel tested
• What are the fastest UCI-legal road wheels? Wind tunnel testing the big-name brands and Chinese contenders

When it comes to the best pressure washers for cleaning your bike, options and prices vary widely. The choice often comes down to your individual requirements and whether you need a gentle, bike-specific washer or a heavy-duty, general-purpose machine. You also need to keep in mind that high pressure isn't ideal for delicate paintwork or sensitive bearings.

Where you live matters too. I recently moved to a first-floor flat without an outside tap or mains power within reach, making post-ride cleanups a real challenge, and washing a filthy gravel bike in the bath is strongly frowned upon.

Will Jones’ review of the original Kärcher OC3 highlighted a potential solution, but its tiny 4-litre capacity meant it seemed that I'd be making constant trips back inside to refill and complete the job satisfactorily.

Enter the Kärcher OC3 Foldable. Built around an 8-litre collapsible water tank, it fixes the original’s biggest flaw while remaining easy to store and transport. This portable, low-pressure washer has been a total game-changer for post-ride cleaning. Even better, it doubles as a safe washing tool for muddy gear, cycling shoes, and even the dog, though Terry, my Lakeland Terrier, remains unimpressed.

Design and aesthetics 

Unboxing the Kärcher OC3 Foldable immediately reveals how compact it is, a massive plus for storage. Despite its tiny footprint, it genuinely holds 8 litres of water. The secret is its sturdy, accordion-style bucket that collapses down to roughly a quarter of its expanded size, making it easy to stash in a car boot or small cupboard while doubling the capacity of the original 4-litre model.

The tank is made from thick silicone (or thermoplastic elastomer) reinforced by a rigid plastic rim and base. The lid removes for easy filling and features a handy hook to clip onto the side during use, and the hose and pressure gun store neatly inside the collapsed tank afterwards. I initially questioned the durability of the flexible silicone, but after multiple uses, it feels tough enough to resist accidental punctures, leaving me with zero damage concerns.

Operation is intentionally minimalist. The front features a single rubberised power button, an LED indicator, and a USB-C charging port protected by a silicone plug. The battery sits safely inside the watertight plastic base, and that feels solid and well built.

Other thoughtful details include a sturdy handle that easily supports a full load of water, and an internal clip that keeps the hose from tangling, which is a generous 1.8-metre length. The pressure gun feels great in the hand, operating with a simple trigger pull.

Weighing just 2.2 kg (4.85 lbs) empty and 10.2 kg (22.5 lbs) fully loaded, it's easy to carry around.

Performance

Having owned several mains-powered, high-pressure washers, I didn't expect to get the same performance from the OC3 Foldable. I’m also currently testing the Muc-Off Portable Pressure Washer, which is double the price, far larger, and proving a bit of a storage nightmare, which really highlights the compact sizing of the OC3.

The beauty of the OC3 Foldable is that it collapses to almost nothing. At just 108 mm (4.25 in) tall when folded, a 60% reduction in vertical profile – you can easily store it in a small kitchen drawer or keep it in the car. Expanded, it stands at 271 mm (10.7 in), with a static footprint of 305 x 298 mm (12.0 x 11.7 in).

In operation, water flows instantly when you pull the trigger and stops the moment you release it. It is remarkably quiet, sounding more like a dishwasher or standard vacuum cleaner than a traditional jet washer.

While the nozzle spray isn't adjustable, its 5 bar (approx. 72.5 PSI) rating is powerful enough to dislodge stubborn mud while remaining completely safe around paintwork and bearings. The output feels like a strong household shower. I’ve even filled it with warm water to help lift mud. Kärcher rates it for temperatures up to 40°C (104°F); anything hotter risks degrading the silicone walls and internal rubber seals.

One word of caution: if you lean heavily on the bucket when filled, it will collapse and spill water. Accidentally testing this proved the power button's waterproofing works well. Kärcher also warns against submerging the base, so take care if filling it directly from a natural water source when out and about.

Kärcher says the OC3 Foldable has a continuous battery runtime of 15 minutes, and according to the spec sheet, a single charge gives you enough power to empty its full 8-litre tank about three to four times. That I found was pretty accurate, and in bike-cleaning terms, I got four or five cleans before the battery called it a day.

The LED starts flashing when the battery is running low, and a full recharge takes approximately 2.25 hours via its USB-C port.

Value

The Kärcher OC3 Foldable is currently available on Amazon for just £109, cheaper than the £119 standard OC3 model, and far less than the Muc-Off Mobile Pressure Washer starter bundle at £250. Given its performance and convenience, it offers, I think, exceptional value for money.

While it can’t compete with a full-sized pressure washer, it is a brilliant and incredibly useful piece of kit for cyclists with limited space. I absolutely love it; my flat and shower are both significantly cleaner as a result. While comparing it to the Muc-Off model will be an interesting exercise, the Muc-Off's double-the-price tag and much larger footprint make it an unfair fight.

Verdict

The Kärcher OC3 Foldable is perfect for washing your bike before loading it into your car or taking it inside your flat. It’s a viable solution for anyone short on space, lacking an outdoor tap, or travelling on bike trips, as it keeps trail filth out of your living space and vehicle.

At just over £100, it offers fantastic value. While similar cheaper alternatives exist, Kärcher’s reputation for superior build quality makes it worth the extra investment.

You could buy an entry-level, mains-powered unit like the Kärcher K2 for less, but there's little point in comparing the two; this is a specialised tool built for portability and space-saving convenience.

It handles basic grime effortlessly and fits my needs perfectly, especially for a quick rinse-down after a ride, or before loading the bike into the boot. If your cleaning needs sound anything like mine, I can’t recommend the OC3 Foldable enough. I've been hard-pressed to find a single fault in this brilliant piece of kit.

Said trio comprises new pedals, at both Dura-Ace and Ultegra level; new cleats, in four guises; and an update to the brand's top-tier S-Phyre shoes.

Shimano says the launch offers a spread of benefits including lower stack height, more natural engagement, a reduction in weight, and simplified adjustment.

The news comes six months after prototypes of the pedals were spotted by our very own tech writer, Tom Wieckowski, on Jasper Philipsen's bike ahead of Paris-Roubaix, just days before their lack of backward compatibility wreaked havoc on Mathieu Van der Poel's race.

The launch also comes just weeks after Shimano's new Dura-Ace groupset was spotted by Cyclingnews at the Vuelta a España; it seems the Japanese brand has been busy.

The launch is being peddled (pun very much intended) as a holistic system, but I'll break it down to its constituent parts for ease.

New CL-SL120 cleats

At the core of the SPD-SLR launch is a new cleat, to be known as the CL-SL120, which are thinner and lighter than the existing models, and no longer come with the rectangular washers that sit between the cleat and the bolt. This means they no longer offer fore and aft adjustment, but they can still move from side-to-side.

The fore-aft adjustment is instead added to the sole of the new shoes. More on that later.

The cleats are now available in four different guises. There are still three different float options, with the same colour denotations: Red is fixed float (zero degrees), blue is one degree, and yellow is three degrees.

The fourth option is a grey cleat, which offers the same three degrees of float as yellow, but brings the rectangular washer back into the fold for anyone needing extra adjustment with their cleat position. The downside to this configuration is that you concede the reduction in stack height offered by the others.

Interestingly, Dura-Ace pedals will now be shipped with yellow cleats, rather than the blue they've typically shipped with.

The other small but tangible benefit is a reduction in weight. The new cleats themselves are 16g lighter, at 55g, thanks in most part to the removal of those metal washers.

New Dura-Ace PD-R9300 and Ultegra PD-R8200 pedals

Next up, Shimano has redesigned its two highest tiers of pedals too, with a new R9300 Dura-Ace pedal, and an R8200 Ultegra pedal. A quick aside is that this confirms there's also a new Ultegra groupset on the way, because existing Ultegra components are given the R8100 moniker, not R8200.

The primary claimed differences here surround the weight of the pedals, the interface between the pedal and the cleat, and how easy it is to clip into them in the first place.

According to Shimano, the existing pedals hang at 15.5° behind vertical, whereas the new versions hang slightly more vertically, at 10.5°. This means a slightly larger area to 'catch' the cleat as you bring your foot forward into it, but also 5° less rotation needed before you're clipped in.

Perhaps more tangibly, a Shimano spokesperson also told Cyclingnews that the new system reduces any small gaps or flex that can be created between the pedal and the cleat when pulling up in a sprint or when climbing, adding to the feeling of being securely connected to the pedals.

Elsewhere, the new pedals are technically lighter, but Dura-Ace is a mere single gram better off than its predecessor, at 227g versus 228g. Ultegra is now 228g, down by 20g from 248g.

The differences between the two revolve around the bearings. Dura-Ace's use of a bigger bearing nearer to the crank enables them to be stiffer and less resistant to rotation, making them slightly more efficient.

Stack height differences

Combined with the cleat, the primary gain is a 2.3mm reduction of stack height; aka the distance between the pedal axle and the bottom of your foot. This difference is small, but it's a change that Shimano says improves how well connected you feel to the bike.

Stack height can also have knock-on effects to bike fit, rider position, and in some cases significantly affect a rider's aerodynamics by allowing them to sit lower on the bike, albeit I remain sceptical as to how much will be achieved with 2.3mm difference.

The reduction equates to a total of 12.5mm stack height on Dura-Ace (for pedal and cleat, excluding shoe), and 13.3mm on Ultegra, but this is still some 4mm / 4.8mm higher than the Wahoo Speedplay pedals' 8.5mm claim – albeit they do require that you wear four-bolt compatible shoes.

This is reduced by a further 0.7mm if you wear the new Shimano shoes, but aside perhaps needing the extra fore-aft adjustment that they offer, there is no obligation to use them.

New S-Phyre RC910 shoes

Speaking of shoes, Shimano has also released the S-Phyre shoes that Jasper Philipsen has been spotted using all summer. In fact, he even won a race wearing just one of them back in March.

Shimano has been slowly working its way through the 900s with naming of top-tier S-Phyre shoes. I remember reviewing the RC901 shoes a few years ago, and the RC902 and RC903 have both launched since, each small iterations of their predecessors. Shimano has now jumped straight to RC910, so this one must be serious.

The shoes follow the trendy shift toward wider lasts, and benefit from Shimano's recently-released Dynalast 2.0 tech, which essentially widens the forefoot by 3mm at the toes and 2mm at the ball. They're available in narrow- and wide- versions too.

The big difference related to SPD-SLR, however, is that they have a longer slot for the cleat bolt receiving nuts to sit in, meaning they offer much more fore and aft adjustment when positioning the cleats. This offsets the removal of adjustment within the cleat itself.

Shimano SPD-SLR compatibility explained

Prices

I only have UK and EU pricing at the moment, but I was pleasantly surprised to see that the new pedals are significantly cheaper than the outgoing models.

Of course, this is caveated by the fact that existing Shimano pedals and cleats are very rarely sold at their recommended retail price, but still, it's better than the other way around.

• Dura-Ace pedals will be priced at £199.99 / €229.99 (The old ones retail for £239.99).
• Ultegra pedals will retail at £139.99 / €160.99 (versus £159.99 for the old ones).
• All cleats are slightly more expensive at £24.99 / €28.99 (versus £21.99 before).
• And the new S-Phyre RC910 shoes are £389.99 / €449.99.

First ride impressions and thoughts

Having ridden the new system for the grand sum of around 70km, it's too soon to offer any more than just vibes and feelings, but my initial riding impressions are positive.

I will outline that I'm comparing a brand new pair of Shimano shoes, cleats and Dura-Ace pedals to a pair of Specialized shoes, year-old SPD-SL cleats and three-year-old Ultegra pedals though, which isn't conducive to a fair test. Not to mention the slight guesswork on cleat position as I tried to replicate it by eye.

Unsurprisingly since everything was brand new out of the box, I felt slightly more locked into the new pedals, and the action of clipping in felt cleaner.

I've used Shimano pedals for a decade almost exclusively, so clipping in felt entirely natural, which is positive. I wouldn't necessarily call it better, but in my opinion Shimano was already better than the competition, so I'm just glad to report it's no worse.

I didn't really notice any improvement in my 'connection' to the bike, though. I dropped my saddle by a couple of mm to offset the change in stack, and it all felt similar. I'm sure more back-to-back riding will tease out some perceptible differences, but they'll be small if noticable at all.

I fully trust that the new system is marginally better than the old one, but I wouldn't be rushing out to swap my bike over to the new system unless my existing Shimano pedals were wrecked. Shimano's problem here is that this takes an age to happen, so I expect uptake of the SPD-SLR to be slow.

The lack of backwards compatibility will also contribute to this, as anyone with more than one road bike is going to face an expensive switch when they make the jump. You can't just upgrade each pair of pedals or cleats as they wear out, it will require changing all your pedals at once, or consigning yourself to forever swapping pedals between bikes.

The one thing that remains unknown is whether the brand will license the design to brands like Favero in order to make a compatible power meter, or lock it down like they did with SPD-SL. The SPD-SL patent expired in around 2022, twenty years after it was initially filed ahead of their 2003 launch. This opened the door to brands like Favero to make SPD-SL compatible power meter pedals, which no doubt stole market share away from Shimano's crank-based power meters.

Cyclingnews understands the new SPD-SLR will be patented, but the brand was unclear on its plans for licensing out the new design to the same brands. There is a cynic inside me that wonders if that isn't in fact the primary motivation for the redesign in the first place, and that the stack height improvement is just a convenient front to hide behind.

As Campagnolo expands its gravel range and revitalises the entire Super Record groupset to include off-road electronic Super Record X, it brings with it a new gravel-focused iteration of the famous Bora wheels, the Bora X. The brand claims the new wheelset brings the best out of the new groupset, and vice versa, due to the synergy between components.

I can’t comment on that, having not tested the new Super Record X groupset, but after a lot of riding on the Bora X wheelset, I can confirm that it is a highly competent wheelset in many ways.

It’s lightweight for a 50mm deep wheel, although it is a little on the narrow side by some standards meaning it is perhaps better suited for 40-45mm tyres rather than larger. However, the greatest performance aspect of these wheels is the balance of stiffness. Lateral and torsional stiffness are easy enough to achieve, but to manage that with vertical compliance for a comfortable ride is sublime for gravel riding.

A hoard of high-quality parts, bags and accoutrements boost the value of these wheels, although they are still a shade under two grand. The cup and cone bearing system is perhaps not the preference for most, it works well if you look after it. Not to mention, the wheels frankly look stunning. They are a real winner in my books and a perfect addition to any gravel race bike.

Design and specifications

The Campagnolo Bora X wheels are built upon a unidirectional carbon rim that very closely resembles the Bora WTO rims used on the road. The 50mm depth is high for a gravel wheel, and closely on trend with the increasing focus on aerodynamics in the discipline. The width of the rim is where the changes are bigger, with a 27mm internal channel designed for 35mm tyres and larger, using hooked rims still giving some riders that added sense of security. Externally, the rim reaches 31.5mm wide, relatively narrow by some standards in today’s market.

The rim also features a solid rim bed, eliminating the need for tubeless tape, with spokes instead adjusted externally. Valves are supplied and are long enough for the 50mm depth, which is designed to make tubeless setup very easy time after time. A glorious gloss C Lux finish is present on the rims, offset with a mix of matte black and chrome logos, which personally makes this a stunning set of wheels.

Moving down from the rim, the spokes are laced in the iconic G3 lacing pattern. This uses sets of three spokes, one on the non-drive side at the rear and the non-rotor side at the front, two on the drive-side rear and rotor-side front. This results in a 2:1 ratio 21-spoke lacing configuration, with the seven radially laced, and the 14 using a three-cross arrangement. The spokes themselves are straight pull and bladed, but not all of them, some are rounded to balance stiffness and comfort for gravel riding.

The freehub is available for all standards from Campagnolo, SRAM, and Shimano, and uses NSW ceramic bearings, rather than the top-end CULT offering, with cup and cone rather than cartridge bearings. This requires a bit more maintenance, but if looked after, should last well. Lightweight lockrings are supplied as standard and attach externally. A nice bonus is the supply of both tyre levers and soft padded wheel bags large enough for wheels with 50mm tyres fitted. Claimed weight is 1,430g, but actual was 1,463g, although with lockrings and valves. Remove those, and the wheels still come in at 1,444g.

Performance

Tubeless setup for these wheels was one of the easiest I've done. The solid rim bed means no rim tape is required, just fit the valves, put the tyres on, and inflate with a track pump to seat. The Panaracer GravelKing ZX 45mm tyres inflated to 45mm exactly on these rims with the 27mm internal width and 31.5mm external. This is a bit narrow by some gravel wheelset standards, especially by modern wider trends, but it allows the versatility to run 35mm and upwards.

I have to say that the wheels look glorious. The C Lux finish combines a gloss carbon weave across the entirety of the rim with a mix of matte black ‘Bora’ logos with a chrome-finished ‘Campagnolo’ and winged wheel nut logo. They reflect the light in the sun and really make the frame pop. They do lose this once the dust from gravel riding gets them, but they’re easy enough to clean. I personally prefer this a lot to the standard matte black that is now all too common.

Of course, these are performance gravel wheels, and they are an impressively balanced set which have several features that really help them on gravel. The spoke lacing is heavily asymmetric, with a 2:1 ratio on the rear drive side and front rotor side to better deal with the asymmetric forces applied to the wheels. This results in the wheels having a superb level of lateral stiffness for out of the saddle accelerations and putting the power down, but also a great deal of torsional stiffness when accelerating and braking.

Impressively, this is balanced with a good amount of vertical compliance which gives them a more plush sensation when riding off road on rougher surfaces. Some of this is apparently to do with the carbon layup, but also the use of elliptical spokes alongside the bladed aero ones. Of course tyres and pressures make up a lot of the cushioning sensation you get, which is why I test with the same tyres and pressures on the same routes to keep things consistent. The Bora X, however, are noticeably more comfortable to ride than other gravel wheels on test with all other variables kept consistent.

A 50mm depth means these are a solid set of wheels when travelling at speed. At speeds around 35kph the wheels start to come alive. I’ve used these on the road a few times as well, and even on faster group rides the wheels feel pretty at home and not much of a compromise compared to road wheels with 30mm tyres.

Impressively, with this rim depth, the weight is competitive. Excluding the valves and lockrings, 1,444g for a 50mm wheelset is impressively lightweight. This is felt out on the trails when accelerating on steeper inclines. This, with the stiffness, means they get up to speed very competently and also brake effectively even on loose surfaces with heavier tyres fitted.

There are some concerns about the longevity of the bearings, however, as a cup and cone setup requires more user input to keep them running smoothly, but if you do this, they will run very well. Generally, cartridge bearings would be used with heavier external seals and potentially internal as well. A ratchet system is still used, but a 36-tooth engagement is on the lower side of teeth numbers. However it is sometimes seen as more resilient than high-tooth ratchets, and in practice the acceleration of the wheels was great even with a lower tooth count.

These wheels are also potentially a little on the narrow side. 27mm internal width works well for 35-45mm tyres, and can be used for wider. However, for using 50-55mm options, as is becoming more frequent, a lot of wheels are adopting a wider internal and external width. Meanwhile, the 31.5mm external width does mean the 45mm tyres used with this sit fairly wide. We’ve seen in wind tunnel testing that although wider tyres carry an aero penalty, this penalty can be reduced if the external width of the tyre is wider to better smooth the interface between tyre and rim. I can confirm that riding on tarmac surfaces, the likes of the Parcours FKT felt to roll a bit faster above 35kph, with a ballooning 40mm maximum external rim width.

Value

£1,999.99/$2,180 is an expensive set of wheels, putting it in the similar regions of the HUNT Limitless 40 UD Spoke with carbon rims, lower weight, and ceramic bearings. Of course, they are far behind the price of the likes of the Roval Terra Aero CLX (£2,998/$3,400) and the ENVE G SES 6.7 Pro (£3,500/$3,100).

My personal feeling with these wheels is that the versatility they offer is impressive. I like the inclusion of hooked rims, and with some 35mm tyres these would be great wheels on rough road surfaces let alone gravel. There is also no user weight limit, and a solid rim bed which makes future tubeless fitting a lot easier as tape won’t come loose while cleaning out old sealant.

Of course there are wheels that are cheaper, and not far off in terms of many performance aspects. The Scope R4G (£1,498/$1,798), for example, are superb, but the hub is like a siren while the Bora X are silent. Meanwhile, the Parcours FKT (£1,249 ) are great when rolling fast, but lack the same stiffness, compliance, and low weight that the Bora X offer.

I am also a big fan of the inclusion of the very lightweight external rotor lockrings, as well as the valves, tyre levers, bag for all of that, and some very high-quality wheel bags. It does mean that the wheelset as a whole does come with some additional value.

There is also the subjective element that I think these wheels look stunning, and that does add value to me. I like to look at the bike and think to myself that it looks great, and these wheels genuinely add to that. This is, of course, a highly individual and personal preference, but as are most aspects of value.

Verdict

The Campagnolo Bora X wheels have become my favourite gravel wheelset to ride. The balance of high stiffness for accelerations, braking, and cornering, combined with vertical compliance for comfort is fantastic. A deep rim depth and low weight also makes them wonderful to ride at speed or on climbs.

My only gripe is the relatively narrow rim width for tyres beyond 40mm, while the bearing setup will require more upkeep. But for the performance and included parts, not to mention looking stunning, the £2k price tag does not appear too high. There are better-value (around £1,500) wheelsets, but I prefer these.

From the best bike computers and indoor smart trainers to precision power meter pedals and rearview radar systems, Garmin’s lineup consistently earns top marks in our expert testing and buying guides.

Shop the Birthday Sale at Garmin.

The Garmin Birthday Sale runs until September 20, offering discounts across the majority of its cycling tech. Our best overall bike computer – the Garmin Edge 1050 has an impressive £70 off, down to just £529. It's the lowest I've seen this year on the flagship Garmin device. It also significantly undercuts the current Amazon Garmin Edge 1050 price of £614.

Below you'll find my top ten selections from the Garmin Sale, and these focus on the UK version. For Garmin US shoppers, the US Birthday Sale is live; sadly, there are more limited offers available.

Saying that, there are still some gems worth highlighting. Including $100 off the Garmin Edge 1040 Solar down to $599. So worth a look for those based in the US.

The Birthday Sale runs until September 20, but with Amazon Prime Day coming in early October, and then Black Friday in November, if you miss out now, there might be plenty of Garmin deals coming. Of course, we'll be highlighting all the offers as they appear, but if you have an eye on something now, why wait?

Below you'll also find the best prices on Garmin cycling tech from other retailers, relevant to your currency and location.

Right now, that incredible value is even better as you can pick up the Michelin Power Cup for just £42.95, reduced from £70 at Merlin Cycles UK.

Get the Michelin Power Cup TLR with 39% off at Merlin Cycles.

Cyclingnews' Senior Tech Writer Will Jones praised the Michelin Power Cup's performance, noting: "I cannot say they felt faster or slower than a GP5000 or the Vittoria Corsa Pro, but matching those benchmark tyres at nearly half the price proves just how good they are."

For US shoppers, the Michelin Power Cup TLR is priced at $48.32 at Merlin Cycles US, reduced from $78.75. However, US shoppers are subject to US import taxes which typically range from 10% to 22% depending on the item's value.

The Michelin Power Cup TLR is priced at $65.50 on Amazon US, down from $88.99 but only in the 28mm sizing.

Michelin Power Cup TLR UK deal

Michelin Power Cup TLR US deal

We've tested nearly every road bike tyre on the market, and the Power Cup featured in our testing at the Silverstone sports engineering pedalling efficiency lab. Up against Grand Tour winning rubber like the Continental GP5000 S TR and the Vittoria Corsa.

There impressive performance earnt them a strong 4 out of 5 stars, and the nod as the best budget offering. We reckon the Michelin Power Cup TLR matches the GP5000's rolling resistance at a fraction of the cost. Will Jones noted: "I love these tyres, and if I wasn’t constantly swapping rubber for testing, these are where I’d spend my own money."

The Power Cup features Michelin's Tubeless Shield technology and 4x120 tpi casing, which they say makes them durable and puncture-resistant. Will was impressed with his own real-world puncture resistance testing, saying, "I’ve had three different sets of the Power Cup, some set up tubeless, some with tubes, and I've only had one puncture."

Elsewhere, review highlights included the Power Cups' grip, even though they are a totally slick tyre, free of tread or sipes (the technical term for tread). Will was happy with the performance here, saying, "I can assure you that (the slick aesthetic) doesn’t make them less grippy." However, Will did add, If you're an aggressive crit racer, cornering hard, then perhaps you’d want to consider a more well-wrapped tread option, but for most of us, I’m pretty confident in saying they’re just fine."

For tubeless users, set up here was relatively pain-free too, and Will said, "They didn’t prove overly difficult to get onto the rim, nor did they present much of a challenge to seat, either with or without sealant in."

If you've never tried a Michelin Power Cup tyre, then at this price, and with up to 39% off, now may well be the time to try them for yourself.

Below, you'll also find Michelin Power Cup deals from other retailers, which show the best prices in your territory.

With that in mind, Zwift has announced a range of updates in its latest 'This season on Zwift' announcement, which, to many riders, signals the start of the indoor training and racing season.

Zwift was founded in 2014, and the platform regularly rolls out updates and new features as technology develops, but also to keep the in-game experience fun.

The California-based company also acquired competitor indoor training platform, Rouvy, back in April. Within the latest updatres, Zwift has provided a little more information on what to expect next from this merger. For example, those with a Rouvy subscription will be able to pair Rouvy as a connection, which will sync activities across the two, and Rouvy rides will now accumulate Zwift XP at a rate of 5XP per kilometre.

This rollout delivers a range of updates, from hardware to virtual bikes. Here's the breakdown.

A new Zwift Ride smart bike

A new Zwift Ride V2 smart frame is available, starting today. The V2 model's price remains the same as the original, at $1299.99 / €1199.99 / £1099.99, but the brand says the new unit is more adjustable.

There's a new compact frame, which can fit riders from 4'10 to 6'6, and the V2 model will have multi-length crank arms as standard, so riders can choose between 160, 165, 170, 172.5, and 175mm crank arms.

There's also an updated seatpost design for more fore-aft adjustability. These changes make sense. If you are going to offer an adjustable indoor-specific smart bike, a wide range of adjustability is going to be necessary, and we cited the fixed crank length as a drawback in our review of the V1 bike.

Zwift says the adjustable cranks and updated seatpost will be available to buy separately if you want to upgrade the V1 model.

Software and game updates

A familiar part of the Zwift experience for many will be the home screen, where rides, races and training sessions can be selected. The home screen will get a refresh in late September. Planning and progress information will be given priority, and your next activity will be easy to access.

A new progress widget will also help Zwifters track progress towards weekly goals and career progression stats, which we understand was a much-requested update.

Zwift tells us that the Companion app is also being given a major update. It will be easier to view your training week and track fitness thanks to the new activity graph layout.

A new 'Watt Lock' function has also been created. It's an ERG mode toggle during free rides that allows riders to easily lock onto a target power. This sounds ideal for staying in a specific training zone. Players can also use Zwift game controllers to toggle the Watt Lock.

A new connection has also been created with the wrist-based fitness tracker, Whoop. This will allow Zwifters to connect their Whoop wearable and receive insights based on their Whoop Recovery score.

According to Zwift, on Whoop red days, it will auto-adjust personal riding recommendations to tailor athletes' sessions. Later in the fall, Zwift rides and runs will also be visible in the Whoop app.

Watopia, the most popular virtual world in Zwift, is going to be expanded. 18 kilometres of virtual roads are set to be added, inspired by the West Coast of California and Catalina Island. The new roads will feature two crit-style circuits and a flat bypass option around the Epic KOM. A new Archipelago island chain will also be available to discover from October 26th.

New in game racing and events

The Tour of Watopia will run again this year from October 5th to November 22nd. Double Zwift XP points will be on offer, as well as a new 'ultimate challenge'.

A new 'Power Play' campaign will launch in November. This function will make use of power segments in New York, Montmartre and The Grade climbs. Rewards will be on offer for the Power Play challenges.

All this hard work will be rewarded with the chance to win more virtual goodies; alas, Zwift isn't handing out actual bikes as prizes just yet.

Riding in Zwift earns drops. Drops, Zwift's in-game currency, can be spent in the Zwift online store. Virtual Kona and Factor bikes will be coming to the store, as well as Black Inc wheels and the Zwift x Pinarello paint scheme.

Two new Halo bikes from Cervélo and Canyon will be coming too. Only 9000 Zwifters own Halo bikes, and they can be accessed by fully upgrading three bikes from three brands currently. Zwift says to stay tuned for the rollout of this one.

Zwift Racing will also be available with TT, Crit and longer Epic formats; the first series will be sponsored by Dura-Ace (notable timing, given a new version of the groupset was spotted at the Vuelta) and begins this month.

The Zwift Racing League (ZRL) will also begin in September, and as the weather deteriorates, many riders will make use of virtual racing to stay sharp. Zwift is aiming to make the racing more accessible by holding ‘Road to Zwift Racing League’ rides.

A new Race of Truth will also be rolled out, not a time trial as per the name but a mass-start, draftless points race that the brand says will introduce a 'new tactical challenge'.

For its Labor Day Sale, Garmin has sliced $250 off the entire Fenix 8 lineup. This rare holiday sale drops the flagship Fenix 8 AMOLED to $949.99 (down from $1,199.99), marking its lowest price of the year. The discount applies to all size options (43mm, 47mm, and 51mm) for both AMOLED and Solar displays.

Shop the Garmin Fenix 8 and save $250 this Labour Day.

Whether you are looking to treat yourself or upgrade your cycling setup this Labor Day holiday, grab this deal before stock runs out. Looking for a more budget-friendly option? Garmin also slashed $150 off the Venu 3, bringing it down to $299.99.

Garmin is renowned for producing groundbreaking cycling tech, and the Garmin cycling range includes some of the best GPS bike computers, plus the best power meters, smart lights with rearview radar, and of course, smartwatches.

The Labor Day Garmin Sale also has reductions across most of the Garmin cycling range, including our choice as the best cycling computer – the Garmin Edge 1050, reduced to $599.99, with a $100 reduction. The Varia RTL715 Radar Tail Light has a $100 off discount, down to $299.99 and is a recommended rear light that has a clever radar function, which alerts you to traffic approaching from the rear.

The Garmin Labor Day Sale deals are US-based, but our handy price checker below will give you the best up-to-date pricing on the Garmin cycling tech, including the Fenix 8 Smartwatch in your territory.

To remedy this, Swiss wheel manufacturer DT Swiss has partnered with Wahoo to release its own hub based speed sensor, the Trackr Speed.

Designed to ensure your ride is recorded wherever you ride, the DT Swiss Trackr Speed by Wahoo - to give it its full moniker - is designed to clip around the brand's SPLINE and DICUT hubs. Fully encompassing the hub housing, it looks like an integrated part, not an add on and also works with the company’s recently launched 1800 series wheels, ensuring it works with the majority of the gravel and road range of wheels.

Using both ANT+ and Bluetooth, the hub connects to your phone, bike computer or smartwatch, and though we’ve not yet had our hands on the Trackr Hub, DT Swiss assures us it’s quick and easy to connect to your device, and more importantly, install on your rear wheel hub. The device uses its own internal battery, the company claiming up to 94 hours life, when it can be recharged in situ using the magnetic charger.

"When the mountains swallow your signal or tunnels block your connection, this sleek rear‑hub‑optimized sidekick keeps counting," the company’s press release reads, rather poetically. "In partnership with Wahoo, we’ve built a speed sensor that translates every wheel rotation into pure accuracy, even where satellites tap out. No drops. No excuses."

According to DT Swiss’s press material, the Trackr Hub uses a "3-axis accelerometer" to measure each rotation of your wheel to accurately measure your speed, though obviously not your precise location. So, while your ride may still appear as a straight line on Strava, at least you’ll know how far you travelled and how fast you were going when the GPS signal was lost, and, in conjunction with power and heart rate data, you’ll know every inch of your ride.

You can buy the DT Swiss Trackr Speed either on its own or as part of a bundle with the company’s G1800 SPLINE rear wheel. The device on its own will set you back $89.80 (€59.90 / £54.99), while the wheel bundle will cost you $427.90 (€280.90), with no UK pricing available.

It’s certainly a good looking bit of kit and will integrate perfectly with your DT Swiss wheels, and if you ride only their wheels or have a speed sensor for each wheel set you own, its certainly the most elegant and best looking speed sensor we’ve seen.

There is a but. Not only is Wahoo’s own speed sensor called the Trackr Speed - formerly known as the 'Wahoo RPM Speed' - it’s waterproof to the same level, uses the same accelerometer technology, works with all wheel brands and looks like it’s easier to swap between bikes, it’s even 10g lighter. It also retails at £29.99, it just doesn’t look as neatly integrated.

For unbeatable coverage across road, gravel and tech, subscribe to Cyclingnews. You'll get comprehensive race coverage of La Vuelta a España, subscriber-exclusive analysis from our expert columnists, in-depth features and industry-leading tech insight. Plus, the Cyclingnews app lets you follow the action wherever you go! Join today.

From the 4th of October, all SRC Category 1 riders, along with Category 2 riders who have earned more than $2,000 in prize money, will be required to purchase and use approved Favero Assioma PRO RS-2 or RL-2 pedals, which come in at $789, as their primary in-game power source to remain eligible for prize money.

Cyclingnews understands that all Category 1 riders win prize money; this may be individual or team winnings.

Large amounts of prize money are on offer in the MyWhoosh SRC; it's well documented that some riders are taking home over six figures per year in prize money by racing on the platform.

This move by MyWhoosh is aimed at standardising power meters 'to improve integrity in e-racing.' Riders will still be able to race if they don't have the Favero pedals, but they will no longer be eligible for prize money.

“This is an important next step in strengthening the standards behind professional-level cycling e-sports," explained Director of E-sports & Game Operations at MyWhoosh Matt Smithson said;

There's more to the hardware than just a set of power meter pedals, however. MyWhoosh and Favero have designed a 'MyWhoosh eSports Race Mode' which will go live between October and early November.

The MyWhoosh e-sports race mode

MyWhoosh says the new Favero connection will be tested during October under SRC race conditions.

The race mode will auto-verify a rider's power meter for SRC. It will be rolled out within a firmware update and an app update for users.

Up until this point, SRC competitors have been required to complete stringent power and hardware verification checks, including submitting a video to verify equipment setup to be eligible to compete.

MyWhoosh says a properly set-up Assioma Pro pedal system operating the new MyWhoosh race mode, will automatically be accepted for power source verification for the SRC, which should streamline the process for users.

This news means that racers' smart trainers will no longer be their primary power source for e-racing. The trainers will still be a controllable device for resistance and gradient simulation, but the Favero pedals will be the primary power source.

MyWhoosh has published an approved list of smart trainers in the past; it remains to be seen whether riders will still need to use a trainer from this list.

MyWhoosh says the Assioma Pro pedals will control rider avatars in-game, and the power from them will be logged in MyWhoosh's race reporting systems.

Race results will be determined from their power data, and the data from them will be used for post-race power verification.

The Assioma Pro pedals will be the mandatory in-game power source for affected riders from October 4th; testing and validation will run through October, and the MyWhoosh eSports Race Mode will officially launch in late October or early November.

What do SRC e-racers think?

Cyclingnews spoke to elite racer Zach Nehr, who regularly competes in the upper categories of the SRC, to see what an SRC competitor thought about the changes.

Nehr was all for anti-cheating protocols and stringent verification, but cited some inconsistencies across categories, and explained that riders in lower categories are also winning healthy amounts of prize money.

'That was big news to see'. Nehr said on the announcement.

'I think that when riders are earning hundreds or thousands of dollars in prize money, we need to have the absolute highest levels of verification and anti-cheating protocol. If this is what MyWhoosh believes is the solution at this point, then I support it.

'The bigger issue to me is that the new rule is only being applied to Cat 1 and Cat 2 riders, not cats 3-6. Those lower-cat riders are still earning thousands of dollars in prize money, which is a huge problem.

'In my opinion, the prize money should be completely redistributed and only go to Cat 1 to eliminate these barriers and sandbagging, and to motivate riders to try their hardest to reach the highest level. In any other sport, only the top professionals make the money, not low-level amateurs making thousands of dollars annually.'

This Labor Day weekend runs from Saturday, September 5, through Monday, September 7, 2026, and for cyclists, it's the perfect chance to upgrade your gear.

Whether you're looking to score a new bike, invest in fresh apparel, or grab one of the best cycling computers, these early deals offer massive savings.

I've been hunting around, and the tech discounts are some of the best I've seen. Below you'll find my top picks on tech reductions from the likes of Garmin and Wahoo.

If you're not looking for a tech deal and want to browse for yourself, then you can do just that using the links below.

Amazon: Save big on Garmin and Wahoo with site-wide reductions

Competitive Cyclist: Save up to 50% on road and gravel gear

Backcountry: Labor Day sale with up to 60% off

Jenson USA: Discounts on bikes, components, clothing, tools and more

Performance Bike: Save up to 50% off Specialized bikes and clothing

The majority of the Labor Day sales look set to end on September 8/9, so don't hang around, as some items are showing as selling fast and are only available while stock lasts.

Labor Day Tech deals

The above deals are just a small selection of what's available across the major cycling retailers and their individual Labor Day sales, and if you're on the hunt for a particular item we would suggest having a look at all the deals before it ends, generally on September 8/9..

As these Labor Day deals are only for US-based shoppers, I've added some of today's best Garmin and Wahoo deals from various retailers in your territory below.

In a press release shared with Cyclingnews, Campagnolo stated that the investment will support the Italian brand's 'next phase of development'.

On the investment, the press release explains that "SPAC, as a result of the execution of an investment agreement with Campagnolo’s existing quotaholder, will acquire a minority stake in the company, through a strategic investment."

Details of the transaction or the size of the investor's stake are not being shared at this time. However, the Campagnolo family will retain the majority share and control of the company. Operations will also continue to be based in Vicenza, Italy.

A section of the press release mentions "Campagnolo will continue to operate entirely independently from SPAC’s other investments in the cycling industry, including Pinarello."

Pinarello was sold in 2023 by private equity firm L Catterton to a private office. Reports at the time suggested that the buyer was Ivan Glasenberg, the billionaire investor and owner of both the Q36.5 clothing brand and Pinarello-Q36.5 pro team.

SPAC is an acronym for 'Special Purpose Acquisition Company', a type of financial investment company used to invest in or purchase a company.

Speaking with Cyclingnews, a spokesperson from Campagnolo told us a 'Swiss private investment holding company' was behind the investment.

What does this mean for Campagnolo's future?

Campagnolo has made steps forward over the past few years and, by all accounts, is emerging from a challenging period.

The company set the record straight in February this year, after explaining mass redundancy rumours which started in Italy.

The brand has also released various new groupsets over the past year or so, which have been met with more positive reviews after the lukewarm reception the original Super Record WR groupset received.

The brand says this new investment will "enable Campagnolo to accelerate this journey and invest further in the areas that are strategic to its future."

There is also a mention of the brand "strengthening its connection with elite cycling and professional racing," which will likely be music to the ears of certain fans of the brand and the wider cycling community.

The key development areas of focus are product development, supply chain improvements, improving Original Equipment business, and working with more professional cycling teams.

On the areas of development, the brand said "We need to be fast. The market is fast now, and so we need to provide the best service everywhere."

A delicate moment

Speaking with Cyclingnews, a spokesperson from the company provided insight into what this means internally at Campagnolo, a company which has been controlled by the same family for the best part of a century.

This year has seen the company opening its arms and bringing in external parties to help grow and move the business forward. In March of this year, the company announced the appointment of ex-banker and Rouleur owner Matteo Cassina to its board of directors.

'It's very big; Matteo was the first external person to join the board, and now we have a minor stakeholder that is a first for the company. It's a very delicate moment, and an important day for Campagnolo as a company, and also for the Campagnolo family.'

Accell has been in trouble for some time, and was finally declared insolvent on August 5, putting its brands at risk of closure. However, court proceedings in Dijon, France have given Lapierre some breathing space.

The company will now enter a six-month period of court supervised restructuring, which is designed to preserve jobs, facilitate the company’s continued operation, and address the company’s liabilities.

"This morning the Commercial Court of Dijon opened the receivership of Cycles Lapierre," Perrier posted on his LinkedIn page earlier this week.

"This is the decision we came to ask for. Let's be clear: it doesn't mean that everything is settled, nor that Lapierre is saved. It means that we have obtained the right and the time to fight."

Lapierre has been making bicycles in Dijon since 1946 and in recent years, has supplied teams like Groupama-FDJ and FDJ-SUEZ in the men’s and women’s WorldTour pelotons. In 2025 it began supplying bikes to all the teams under the Picnic-Post-NL umbrella, and it seems the current news is good for the supply of hardware to the Dutch squad.

"The activity continues in Dijon and we will gradually resume assembly," Perrier continued. "I want to salute the women and men of Lapierre once again. Every order processed, every delivery kept, every customer and supplier reassured builds our credibility with investors."

Small steps in a challenging market

After earlier acquiring a minority holding, Accell took ownership of Lapierre in 1996. Last year Lapierre generated €99.1 million in revenue, reducing its losses by €19.1 million in a single year, and with its manufacturing, R&D and sales infrastructure, Lapierre believes the structure "encompasses the functions required to build an autonomous company".

As it looks forward, Lapierre will enter a three-phase restructuring, first securing its current operations, before developing itself into the standalone business, then searching for an investor.

As in other parts of the world, the French bicycle market is currently re-finding its feet, a situation acknowledged by the company. "The French bicycle market remains in a correction phase but still represents a value of € 3.1 billion," read a company press release. "These results do not mean that a turnaround is guaranteed. However, they do show that loss reduction has begun and that the work already started must now be continued within a standalone framework."

Despite the apparent good news, the company’s presence in WorldTour is far from certain, with teams likely to be unwilling to partner with a company with an uncertain future, thus further damaging Lapierre’s visibility.

Whatever, no such salvation is currently on hand for Accell’s other sporting brands, Ghost and Raleigh, while its leisure bike brands, Batavus, Sparta, Carqon and Babboe also remain in peril.

For unbeatable coverage across road, gravel and tech, subscribe to Cyclingnews. You'll get comprehensive race coverage of La Vuelta a España, subscriber-exclusive analysis from our expert columnists, in-depth features and industry-leading tech insight. Plus, the Cyclingnews app lets you follow the action wherever you go! Join today.

Most of the feedback, at least of the negative type, centred around the fact that while SRAM has gone entirely wireless throughout its performance range on road and gravel, and Campagnolo is following suit, Shimano seems to be steadfastly sticking to a semi-wireless setup. This caused some degree of surprise throughout the commenteriat, especially given the latest GRX and XTR is fully wireless.

Does this matter, though? There’s a case to be made on both sides, and so it pays to analyse a good faith argument for each.

The case for going fully wireless

At the time of the last Dura-Ace release Shimano was much more dominant in the componentry market, with SRAM playing catch up. Now the tables have flipped somewhat, especially at the lower end of the market. It’s a lot easier to explain ‘you have one kind of battery and you just need to charge it in house house every now and then’, rather than ‘the battery is in the down tube or seat tube and the shifters are wireless to the rear derailleur, which acts as a brain, and that is hard wired to the battery and the front derailleur so you have to plug your bike into the wall in-situ’.

I get that SRAM has a patent on using identical batteries, but even different batteries as is the case with Campagnolo is an easier system to live with. Mechanically speaking it’s a lot easier to set up, too. Routing brake cables and hoses is a pain but I find routing Di2 wires infuriating. I will admit the mineral oil in Shimano brakes is far more pleasant to deal with than hateful DOT fluid, and I think Hollowtech cranks are a breeze compared to Dub, but purely from the gearing setup SRAM has it licked and that is why they seem to be cornering the market from the bottom up I think.

It also makes sense for bike designers. If your batteries are all external you can omit ports in the chainstays, which will reduce cost ever so slightly. The same goes for the conundrum of where to place the battery, which seems to have migrated in recent years from the seatpost to the base of the down tube as seat tubes have got more narrow or simply more complex. I suspect there are more than a few brands who were hoping to see fully wireless, just because it would make their lives easier.

The final point for going wireless is that it both looks neater because you don’t have a wire sticking out the back of your chainstay, and it’s potentially slightly less prone to accidental snagging in a crash because there isn’t a wire sticking out of your chainstay. Nearly every tech gallery we produce from any race features some very neat cable routing, either through aftermarket direct mount derailleur hangers, or via the judicious use of strips of inner tube or tastefully arranged zip ties, all in an effort to keep the whole system plugged together in an emergency, and all of which would be unnecessary if it wasn’t wired.

The case for keeping the wire

A quick check revealed that SRAM claims approximately 60 hours of ride time for road derailleurs from a full charge.

Shimano doesn’t provide an approximate number of riding hours for its batteries, but according to the brand's site, 1,200 to 1,500 miles of riding can be expected from a full battery charge.

The Shimano battery will last longer, but it’s not necessarily night and day as I suspected. Regardless, I will continue with the defence, Your Honour. Keeping the wired system means the battery can live inside the frame, and with some clever placement (remember how they’re often at the base of the down tube now), this can have positive implications on weight distributions and the centre of gravity. It’ll be marginal in the grand scheme of things. But having the weight centralised at the bottom bracket (ish) will be a net benefit for handling.

There are also claims in the comments that Shimano’s system has faster shifting, particularly at the front, and while this is true, this isn’t down to the wireless vs wired nature of the systems but rather the internal protocols. SRAM shifters have a barely perceptible delay as it has to wait to see if you’re also going to hit the other paddle to shift the front derailleur, whereas Shimano systems can be immediate.

The final case for the defence is mostly aesthetic, but also has some performance implications. Not having a battery attached to both the front and rear derailleurs means they can be smaller, and smaller is more aero and, depending on your point of view, more aesthetically pleasing, though it must be said that people do seem to be appreciative of the quite bulky looks of SRAM’s XPLR derailleurs. It also means that, with a smaller front derailleur, there is hypothetically a greater width of tyre that can be fitted at the rear before either going no larger, or having to swap to a 1x system. Proponents of SRAM will point out at this juncture that you can just go 1x13, and it’s fine, but personally I always prefer the smaller jumps between the sprockets on a more traditional 2x setup.

What would I rather have?

The fence I’ve been sitting on for the last 1,000 words or so is getting rather uncomfortable, so rather than acting as a lawyer for both the defence and the prosecution I am also going to be the Judge, and my verdict is that I think the fact that Shimano hasn’t gone wireless with the latest Dura-Ace (assuming of course that this is the final form) is a mis-step.

I don’t think the slight improvement in battery life and smaller derailleurs makes up for the gains that could be won with a true wireless system in terms of usability and liveability. I much prefer working on Shimano bikes in the workshop. I can bleed brakes with ease without worrying about the fluid eating my paint. I can take the crankset off in seconds, and swapping chainrings is a breeze. I prefer the interface of the cassette and lockring vs a single piece as I find I am less likely to mis-thread a lockring. The wires are a pain, though, when building a bike, and finding your battery has dropped out the bottom of your seatpost and needs fishing out is infuriating and there is an easy fix for both.

More than how it will impact Dura-Ace though, I think the main knock on impact of this will be felt further down the line; if Shimano refuses to adopt wireless for its lower tier groupsets, and I’m particularly thinking of 105 level, it will be seen as a more complicated system and also a more dated one in the eyes of the consumer, and could well drive more new cyclists into the arms of SRAM, locking them into that ecosystem for when they next upgrade up the product tree.

I’m in little doubt that Dura-Ace will perform well out on the road. The current one still, in my view, shifts better than SRAM, but there’s more to how a groupset performs than how crispy the shifts are.

'When is new Dura-Ace arriving?' has been the question on tech fans' lips for many months now. We saw prototype Dura-Ace pedals back at Paris Roubaix in the spring, and the latest Dura-Ace R9370 wheels launched at the end of last month.

While the latest SRAM Red top-flight road groupset came out in 2024, the last time we saw a new Dura-Ace from Shimano was way back in 2021 when it jumped from 11sp (remember that?) to 12.

Now, five years on, Cyclingnews has spotted new Dura-Ace shifters, derailleurs, chainsets and more, and as expected by many, it’s going from 12 to 13 speeds.

We didn't have long to snap these photos before being ushered away by team staff, so here’s everything we can decipher, and everything else we know so far about what we understand will be Dura-Ace R9300.

Thirteen speed

While SRAM Red (the road-going version) is 12-speed, its XPLR range is 13, and both Campagnolo’s Record and Super Record groupsets are too, as are its Ekar off-road components. As expected, the latest Dura-Ace has caught up, offering that extra sprocket at the rear.

The image above clearly shows 13 sprockets on the cassette. What can't be deciphered, however, is how big that small sprocket is. When Shimano launched XTR for its MTB riders last year, it offered a 9-45t rear cassette, and while we don’t expect to see a 9t sprocket on the road as the UCI commissaires may really get antsy with gear restriction, a 10t is far from out of the question to match SRAM.

What we also couldn't see, but do understand from reports online, is that this bump up from 12 to 13 speed necessitates a new freehub body, so if you’re running a standard Shimano HG freehub you will need to factor that change in.

Alloy cranks, still

Aside from the missing branding and the newly designed power meter, the cranks look a lot like the existing ones. While SRAM and Campagnolo have both moved to carbon fibre for their top-end cranksets (and other bits besides), Shimano has remained steadfast in its use of alloy, despite an extremely high-profile crankset recall in recent years.

This bonded alloy construction has been the norm since it appeared on Dura-Ace in 2010, despite a brief flirtation with carbon for a special-edition Dura-Ace crankset a few years before, and things don’t seem to be changing in any way for 9300.

1x or 2x?

Unusually in the image above, the crank is paired with what appear to be aftermarket rings. Shimano has long used hollow forged chainrings that meet the crank spider smoothly, but here, it appears the chainrings aren't made to be used with the R9300 chainset, because they are fitted with bolt covers.

This could merely be a case of a prototype product, not quite being finished yet, or it could suggest the brand is looking more at standard machined chainrings and a better compatibility with 1x.

It’s not fully wireless

In perhaps the most unexpected news of this leak, it appears the new Dura-Ace isn’t following in the footsteps of XTR, which many expected to pave the way for fully wireless Shimano road groupsets, and appears to be sticking with ‘semi-wireless’.

Assuming it retains the same setup as 9200, that means the system is wireless from the shifter hoods, but the front and rear derailleurs are connected to each other by a battery, usually placed inside either the down tube or the seat tube.

This is evidenced by the short length of cable emanating from the driveside chain stay, connecting to the rear derailleur, meaning you’ll still have to charge your bike in-situ, and fiddle with internal cable routing to some degree on setup.

This also means the dream of true intercompatibility between road, gravel, and MTB components, given that top-end GRX components have also gone fully wireless for their latest iteration, could well have to wait further still, which feels like a mis-step given the direction of travel for the industry.

Riders do currently routinely use Dura-Ace shifters to shift wireless XTR or GRX rear derailleurs, however, so all is not lost.

A UDH replica

UDH, or Universal Derailleur Hanger, is a SRAM thing, but Shimano appears to have a similar version. Reports online show a design that includes an 'anti-rotation pin' inside, but that's not possible to see here, of course.

New shifters, an extra 'thumb' button

Aside from the jump to 13 sprockets, this is the talking point. Instead of 9or perhaps as well as) the hidden button underneath the rubber of the hood, there's a new protruding 'thumb' button on the inner face of each hood.

This matches the latest SRAM Red hood, but presumably takes the tactility even higher; often one of the complaints about both SRAM's and Shimano's 'hidden' buttons.

Better known for its lines of cleaning fluids, pumps, bags, tools and, more recently, TPU inner tubes and sealant, its new Protocol line of tyres provides a wide range of rubber for riders, all of which are tubeless ready.

The gravel range features three different models, and one road tyre, though all come in a variety of widths, the company aiming to shake up the bike tyre market.

"Instead of traditional manufacturing methods that simply scale up road into gravel tyres, SILCA took a fresh perspective by distilling XC mountain bike performance into high-efficiency gravel and road tyres engineered for modern air pressures and rim standards," their press release states.

"The result is a tyre collection that is proven to be faster and more durable than the competition, both in lab and field testing."

With Silca’s range of tyre accessories among their range, it’s no surprise the tyres themselves are designed with their Ultimate Sealant, tubeless valves, rim tape and TPU tubes and even their pressure calculator in mind. It is, in fact, those other products which inspired the company to produce their own tyres.

"Each product answered part of the equation. Eventually, there was one component left. The tyre."

The RCR designated road tyre is listed as 'All-road' and comes in 29, 34 and 38mm widths, is optimised for 25mm internal hookless rims and is "built to eliminate unnecessary weight". The 29mm weighs in at 290g, while the 38mm is a claimed 350g.

The three gravel models each have different intended purposes. Silca claim the RCG-1 is "the fastest gravel tyre ever made," adding the "directional tread is built for hardpack, pavement transitions, and high-speed race conditions."

RCG-3 fits a mixed terrain tyre with extra puncture protection, "directional tread balances rolling speed with grip when the surface turns loose."

Finally, the RCG-4 features an aggressive tread, enough to shed mud on loose surfaces, Silca saying it’s the tyre for "rides that favour control over speed."

All of the tyres come in 45, 50 and 55mm widths and the brand has also developed a 32" specific version of the RCG-3 specifically for 32" gravel wheel bikes, which seem to be gaining traction. All of the tyres retail for £99.

A rider known for his detail-focused approach to gravel marginal gains is Dylan Johnson. Over the past few years, the American racer has become well known for his optimised bike, wheel and tyre choices.

Until now, Johnson didn't have a tyre sponsor, but it seems he played a key part in the development of the new Silca gravel tyre range and has joined the brand as a sponsored rider.

In an Instagram post (embedded below), he explained, "I made no promises to Silca. I told them if the tyres ride well and test well, then we can talk about a contract."

Johnson has raced on tyres from both Continental and Schwalbe in the past, but we should only see him on Silca rubber from now on.

We will aim to test the new Silca rubber for ourselves soon.

For unbeatable coverage across road, gravel and tech, subscribe to Cyclingnews. You'll get comprehensive race coverage of La Vuelta a España, subscriber-exclusive analysis from our expert columnists, in-depth features and industry-leading tech insight. Plus, the Cyclingnews app lets you follow the action wherever you go! Join today.

The wheels beat big-name rivals from some of the world's best cycling brands, including Reserve, Scope and DT Swiss. If you are looking to upgrade your wheels and fancy a set of Hunts, then you'll want to check out the Hunt Summer Sale. You can grab up to 40% off some of our favourite tried-and-tested wheelsets, and although the 5AM Limitless aren't included, there are some big deals to be had on many of Hunt's excellent wheels.

Shop the Hunt Wheels Summer Sale, and grab up to 40% off.

Below you'll find all the information on the Hunt Summer Sale discounts, and be sure to click the 'View Details' section, where you'll find a brief rundown on each wheel and links to our expert reviews. With some marked as limited stock, I'd suggest that if you have your eye on a particular wheelset, you pull the trigger fast.

The highlighted deals are from the US Hunt Summer Sale, but for those in the UK, the Hunt Summer Sale has plenty of equally appealing discounts.

Below you'll also find the best prices on Hunt wheels from other retailers, relevant to your currency and location.

You may have noticed that we're forever bopping back and forth to and from the wind tunnel, bringing you news of which bike, helmet, wheels, and even socks are the fastest, but we've never really lifted the lid on what actually happens behind the scenes; there simply isn't room in a 10,000 word treatise on bicycle aerodynamics to get into how a day of testing actually unfolds, including the 6am smash and grab for supermarket meal deals and baked goods.

• What are the fastest UCI-legal road wheels? Wind tunnel testing the big-name brands and Chinese contenders

Now we have a blossoming YouTube channel on which to show things, we decided to bring some cameras along for our latest wind tunnel test of aero road wheels, and you get to watch it before it goes on the YouTube channel just by hitting play below. You can see everything from prep and standardisations, to how the tunnel actually operates, to what fizzy drinks we buy to keep Josh fuelled up so he can do maths and spreadsheets all day.

{kiosq_button:center}

As a subscriber, you can also watch our ever-expanding archive of bike reviews over on the Cyclingnews app before anyone else - just hit the 'video' tab at the bottom to see them all. But if you'd like to head over to YouTube and give us a like and subscribe to help us grow too, we'd really appreciate the boost.

And don't forget, you also get access to all of our CN Labs testing, unlimited access to our unrivalled racing coverage, and member-exclusive long-read features on the biggest storylines within cycling.

Thanks as ever for your support.

The 'Mega Sale' features up to 50% discounts on a wide range of cycling kit, from shoes and tyres to bikes and accessories.

Summer may be drawing to an end, but as cyclists we all know there's usually something we need. This is a good chance to treat yourself ahead of the winter months.

For example, one of the best gravel bike tyres, the Vittoria Terreno T30 has 20% off in 40mm and 45mm sizes, and is available for $65.59, a healthy saving over the usual MSRP of $81.99.

Shop the Mike's Bikes Mega Sale – Ends on Sunday, August 16th.

The sale finishes on Sunday the 16th; that gives you plenty of time to browse the sales online, or even in-store if you are in the US, and grab yourself something exciting.

I've looked through the sale and have selected a range of discounted items that I think are really worth looking at. There are big-ticket items like high-end road bikes, and affordable quality sunglasses that I have used myself.

Mike's Bikes also offers FREE shipping on all orders over $99 (including all bikes).

Mike's Bikes Bike Deals

Mike's Bikes Tech Deals

Mike's Bikes Helmet And Shoe Deals

Mike's Bikes Apparel and Sunglasses Deals

The Mike's Bikes 'Mega Sale' is US-only and officially ends on August 16, so grab a deal. Below you'll find the best prices on some of the highlighted deals from other retailers, relevant to your currency and location.

Scope has risen in prevalence over the last few years, with WorldTour teams opting to use its fish scale inspired Artech wheels ahead of sponsor correct equipment, and Netcompany-Ineos partnering with them for the 2026 season. The Artech 6.A wheels even tested fastest in our 2024 round of wind tunnel wheelset testing.

The Scope R4.G represents the more wallet friendly option in the brand's gravel wheel line-up, which includes this, and the Artech 4.G.

It uses similar technologies and profiles to the Artech, but at a weight cost. A modern, wide internal and external hookless rim is used, making it comparable with several other carbon gravel wheelsets in this price bracket.

Additionally, sealed bearings, a reinforced rim, and no weight limit sets the wheels up nicely to be resilient across rugged gravel terrain, and my impressions from testing them has supported that. The weight is highly competitive with others in this bracket, while the aero performance with 45mm tyres results in very little speed loss versus a road wheelset on tarmac.

My only gripes are the rotors being a nightmare to fit and remove, and the freehub wailing like a banshee, making me feel self-conscious when riding down the residential street at unsociable hours.

But overall, these are a superb set of gravel wheels that offer fantastic value, and truly deserve a place in our buying guide to the best gravel bike wheels. What's more, they would be brilliantly paired with any of the best gravel race bikes, especially better value offerings.

Design and specifications

The Scope R4.G wheels are built using what Scope calls Algorithm Enhanced Aerodynamics (AEA), the same process used to develop the Artech rims. This process runs through different rim profile designs at different wind speeds and angles to devise the fastest solution. Although no fish scale rim profiles are present in the R4.G, many of the technologies from the very fast Artech wheels are applied.

The rim uses a 45mm tall rim with hookless beads, with an internal width of 28mm and external width of 38mm (albeit 27.08mm and 37.04mm measured though on my calipers).

This does place them among the wider offerings on the market and is designed to work best with tyres at 40mm and wider (35-60mm is the claimed width that these wheels can be used with).

The rim has also been specifically reinforced around the spoke holes, adding strength where needed without excessive carbon where it is not required.

Spoke lacing is a 2:1 two-cross at the front on the rotor side, radial on the drive side with 21 spokes total, while the rear is a 2:1 two-cross pattern on the drive side and one-cross on the rotor side, with 24 Sapim CX-ray alloy spokes.

This asymmetric spoke lacing, cross pattern, and number is aimed to balance the wheel against the forces of both braking and also drivetrain torque.

The hubs are Scope’s own R-Series hubs, and use a labyrinth system which essentially aims to block dirt from entering the hubs and bearings thus increasing longevity.

Internally a 36 tooth Diamond Ratchet SL is used. This 10 degree engagement is a bit higher (and thus slower) than some, but there are claims that fewer teeth results in greater ratchet longevity, and when keeping pressure on the pedals it has little impact on performance compared to higher counts.

The diamond carbon like coating is designed to prevent cassette bite into the free-hub body, while also reducing the weight. Claimed weight is 1,436g without tape or valves, while actual weight on my scales was 1,444g with tape and valves, so lighter than claimed.

Two decal options are available, with black or white options. Hub options range across Shimano and Shimano Microspline, SRAM XDR, Campagnolo, and Campagnolo N3W. Tubeless valves and rim tape are provided, but not lock-rings.

Performance

Fitting the tyres to the Scope R4.G was a nicel and simple affair. The 45mm Panaracer GravelKing ZX I use for gravel wheel tests can be a little tough to fit, but in this situation were able to be fitted without the need for levers. Given the wide and hookless rim, this was easier than I have found on similar gravel rims, while the tyres seated easily enough as well.

One area worth highlighting however was that the rotors are a pain to fit. The same system is used as on the Artech wheels, a lighter weight spline for the rotors, but it almost appeared slightly misaligned making them harder to fit than would be considered normal.

Getting out on the wheels, there are two things that are apparent pretty quickly when riding them; the ratchet engagement is a little sluggish by comparison to high tooth competitors, and the freehub is the loudest one I have ever used.

The ratchet uses a 36-tooth engagement, meaning it takes at most 10° of pedalling to engage the freehub. Hunt for example uses a 54-tooth ratchet, which means faster engagement. It’s only really noticeable when riding in scenarios where you are on and off the power regularly, so more techy terrain with lots of non-pedalling corners. Once rolling at speed, it makes little difference, and the Diamond Star ratchet Scope uses is extremely solid. I have tested a lot of Scope wheels, and the ratchet has never displayed any form of slip, and has proven to be very resilient.

The freehub noise is an interesting point. For early morning rides as I approach the end of my street, I found myself choosing to pedal while braking to avoid waking the entire street.

On the flip side, when riding shared trails with pedestrians, the freehub works better than any bell at alerting people to my presence. Coast for a few seconds and pedestrians a good 100m ahead turn around wondering why an angry hoard of hornets is approaching them.

I know some people enjoy a loud freehub, but this is a bit beyond my personal preference. I much prefer the almost silent running of the Campagnolo freehubs, but credit where credit is due, it acts as a fantastic alert when riding the trails. People will not miss you coming.

In terms of performance though, I am thoroughly impressed with these wheels. Scope might have gained more fame through the Artech wheels with fish scales and top level aero performance, but the R range of wheels are less than half the price and have most of the same performance.

I’ve even bought several pairs over the years, so can attest to putting my money where my mouth is. With the 45mm tyres fitted, measuring a shade under that width, and a 37mm external width, the wheels roll superbly and hold speed well. Going on the tarmac to head to the trails, the speed between these wheels and standard road wheels fitted is not massively different.

I’d say for most gravel this 40-45mm depth range is a very good balance for light enough to accelerate quickly and climb quickly, but deep enough to have some meaningful aero performance at speed.

At 1,444g for a 45mm depth, these are competitively lightweight wheels, and this does show when riding. The thing with gravel is that generally the climbs are tackled slower than tarmac for the same gradient, and gradients can ramp up quickly. This means lower wheel inertia, and weight requires more effort to accelerate up to speed.

Add heavier wider gravel tyres into the mix, and having a lighter rim can make more of a difference off-road than on tarmac. I’ve found the Scope R4.G climb very well, and the strong lateral stiffness also helps maintain a connected feel especially when mashing the pedals on more loose and rocky climbs. This lateral stiffness is most noticeable on the road, as cushioned low PSI wide tyres on gravel always take away an element of reactiveness of the wheels.

Although hookless, and me being a long term hookless sceptic, for gravel wheels with low pressures the system does work well. The tyres have maintained pressure, and going over some horrendously rough terrain and root infested trails, there have been no signs of tyre burps or pinches, and the rim has held up very well.

Value

At a penny under £1,500, these are not cheap wheels, but for a deep carbon wheelset they are in the bracket that I would term as good value. They sit alongside the likes of the Hunt Limitless CGR 40, and Reserve 44/40 G wheelsets. The Parcours FKT undercut them a bit at £1,249, and are deeper at 47mm and a fraction wider internally and externally, but also hookless and a touch heavier.

It’s a very competitive bracket for performance gravel wheels, and at this point they all have rather similar performance features, with just small differences separating them. If you want a quieter freehub, then the Scopes are not the wheels to go for, unless you get the brand’s special Silence Grease to reduce the known buzz of the Diamond Ratchet system. If you want to run wider tyres, maybe the Parcours are best with the 40mm external width.

If you want a pretty bombproof option with more heavily reinforced hub seals, no weight limit, and something that can tackle pretty much any form of terrain you throw at them, the Scope R4.G are certainly worth considering. Having used Scope R-line wheels across the last few winters, the hubs have held up exceptionally, and some truly heinous potholes have not led to any rim failures even when tyres have blown out spectacularly.

My best way to substantiate the value I see in these wheels, is that I have personally purchased sets of the road going version myself. Value is always subjective, but these are something I would, and indeed have, spent my own money on. I would suggest for most people that these wheels offer most of the performance of the likes of the Scope Artech 4.G, but for £2000 less.

Verdict

There's a much more expensive model in the range, but in my opinion, the Scope R4.G wheelset is the best gravel wheelset that Scope offers. Although the Artech model is lighter and potentially a little more aero, the cost is huge by comparison and there are some concerns about the delicateness of the hubs for off-road use.

The R4.G represent much better value in the carbon gravel wheelset market overall and based on previous experience with Scope R-line wheels the longevity should be impressive too.

The hub is intrusively loud though, and the rotors are a bit tough to fit and remove, but overall these are a highly impressive wheelset and a sensible investment for those who want a fast, lightweight, and resilient set of gravel wheels.

The Garmin HRM 600 takes many of the features of the cheaper HRM 200 and builds upon them in a quest to become the best chest strap heart rate monitor on the market.

Not only does it read heart rate, but it also takes heart rate variability. Added to that are a host of other features that are somewhat lost on just cyclists, but for multisport athletes such as triathletes there are a lot of very useful additions.

New for Garmin chest strap monitors, this is the first unit that is rechargeable rather than using coin cell batteries. The battery life is solid, lasting on average a month or more for most users. Add to this a very comfortable strap, and useful LED lights on the front of the pod, and it’s a highly capable unit. But the cost is high, and for just cycling, many of the features feel unnecessary.

Design and specifications

First and foremost, the pod has been completely redesigned. There is now a button on the front, which like the HRM 200, can be used to set up pairing to avoid unwanted connections to the device, and also to check battery status thanks to the LEDs on the front. It works exactly the same way as the HRM 200, so to refresh your memory; the button needs to be held to enter pairing mode to easily connect to a bike computer or smart watch, and then single pressed in the future to wake it up.

The front LED has different flash patterns for connecting (orange flash), and connected (green dual flash). The LED can also display battery level at the point of waking up; green flash is okay, orange flash is low, red flash is critical.

The pod can then be removed, where at the rear you'll find the charging port, something new for chest strap heart rate monitors for Garmin and now competes with the Wahoo Trackr HRM. This is a now standard Garmin connector, the same used on the new Garmin Cirqa competitor to Whoop, and the Garmin smartwatches. Claimed battery life is ‘up to 2 months’, based on 1 hour use per day. So divide your hours ridden per week by seven to work out a rough average of how many hours a day you use it, and you’ll get an idea of a recharging schedule.

The heart rate monitor is resistant to five 'atmospheres' (often denoted as ATM) of water pressure, for those wanting to swim, which is more than enough to deal with rain and sweat from cyclists.

Data for HR and HRV is transmitted via the standard BLE (three concurrent connections) or ANT+ (unlimited), but the HRM 600 can also record activities itself when linked with the Garmin Connect app. It monitors distance travelled, calories burned, and intensity minutes, along with other features more running and swimming focused.

Weight is 18g (0.65oz) for the pod and 61g (2.2oz) for the strap as well (accurate as per my scales). XS-S (60-85 cm, 23.5"-33.5") and M-XL (80-119 cm, 31.5-47.0") are available and can be adjusted easily. A small tab on the inside of the latch is included to prevent irritation.

Heart rate itself is measured via Electrocardiography (ECG) taking actual electrical readings from the chest and heart, which tends to be far more accurate, especially with sweat present, than optical light based sensors used on the wrist or arm.

Performance

Using the M-XL strap, the sizing was spot on for me, and adjusting to size was very easy. Over the course of the testing period, the strap has not moved so the fit has remained consistent; something I have had issue with on other brands' chest straps. I really like the small tab inside of the latch, as this can be an area that causes irritation, but this removes that issue.

There aren’t grippers as such on the straps, but the large electrode reading pad has a certain grippiness, so it stays in place very easily even in hot weather with lots of sweat.

In terms of the data, I have compared it to several other heart rate monitors. Wearing a Wahoo Trackr HRM along with a Coros arm HRM and Whoop MG. The Garmin HRM 600 and Wahoo Trackr have read very closely, to the point where there is no real shift from the trend lines and data. The Whoop has been less consistent, being a wrist based one, while the Coros is solid as long as you don’t get too sweaty. In conclusion, the Garmin HRM 600 is more than accurate enough for its intended use.

I am a big fan of the rechargeability of the device. A lot of coin cell heart rate monitors previously have not had battery indicators, so you only know the battery is low once it conks out during a ride. With the HRM 600, as with the 200, the LED lights tell you roughly how much battery is left, and the claimed 'one hour per day for two months' seems to track correctly, as after 14 hours a week for a month, I needed to recharge the unit.

Removing the pod is easy, and the cable connects securely making charging a breeze. It’s a little easier with the Trackr HRM as it is magnetic and the pod does not need removing, but equally the charger is bespoke for the Trackr and can disconnect if shifted.

The ability to take heart rate variability (HRV) is useful as a metric to track, but ideally this needs to be taken overnight or first thing in the morning, and a chest strap is not the ideal solution for this as you also need a heat unit or watch to connect to. It’s more accurate than wrist based measurements, but more of a faff. This takes us on to the next issue for cyclists, which is that many of the smart features are more relevant to runners or swimmers.

Essentially, this is the ideal heart rate monitor for triathletes, but for those who just cycle, I think many of the features on offer are somewhat superfluous and will seldom get used.

Value

That superfluousness of features is the issue with the Garmin HRM 600. It’s a great heart rate monitor, and for swimmers, runners, or triathletes I can see real value in the additional features that it offers, but for cyclists, many of those features will not be realised, and you are paying for technology that is not going to be used. At £149.99 it is one of the more expensive heart rate monitors around.

If you want rechargeable units, the Wahoo Trackr HRM is a little over half the price at £79.99, and although it lacks HRV readings, it works very well.

The Magene H613 (£49) is even cheaper and still features the rechargeable element, but at just a third of the price. It means that realistically, for cyclists, if you want a heart rate monitor that doesn’t rely on coin cell batteries, the Garmin 600 HRM is not a good value offering.

Verdict

The Garmin 600 HRM is a great heart rate monitor that is accurate, has a good battery life, features recharging, and has a whole host of smart and additional features. However, many of those smart features are somewhat limited to swimming and running, so from a purely cycling perspective, many of them are superfluous.

At £149.99, this means that this is a very expensive heart rate monitor that might not really bring anything necessary to users looking to just use it for cycling. It’s a great device, but poor value for cyclists.

But in this job, it does sometimes pay dividends, as when I happened upon a short reel of Unbound Gravel and Traka winner, Rosa Klöser’s bike from The Rift, a gravel race in Iceland, something curious caught my eye.

Under her Hammerhead bike computer there was something sticking out that disrupts the relatively smooth flow of the computer mount; a single SRAM satellite shifter blip. Closer inspection, and a little more digging around on Instagram, reveals more, with a pair of blips attached underneath; one behind the other.

These satellite shifters from SRAM are totally wireless, and are usually placed either underneath the tops of the bars to allow riders to shift when climbing, or commonly when riding over the cobbles at Paris-Roubaix, or they’re placed in the crook of the drops for sprinters to allow them to shift up and down without having to reach for the paddles or shifter hoods.

I reached out to SRAM to see what was going on in this case, as the blips can also be used to control the Hammerhead computer screens, which it was suggested by my colleague Tom might make life easier over the rough basalt roads of Iceland. They are, in this case, being used for shifting however:

“Good catch! It’s for the gears indeed, it allows her to shift while staying in a more aero position.”

While the UCI has banned the ‘puppy paws’ position on the road, where a rider supports their weight on their forearms on the tops of the bars, hands lolling in space over the front wheel, things are less draconian in the gravel world, and while Unbound banned aero bars years ago, riders are still free to do whatever they can to get aero on smoother sections of the course.

Placing a pair of blips under her bike computer allows Klöser to stay in this aero, forearms-on-bars position without having to reach out to the hoods each time she wants to shift, and also likely encourages using the computer itself as a hand-hold, stabilising aid.

This isn't a new hack for Klöser however, as interrogation of our Unbound tech gallery reveals her race bike this year for Kansas' big day out had a single shifter installed under the computer too.

When it comes to road wheels, things are moving quickly right now. Carbon spokes are becoming commonplace, wheelset weights are decreasing dramatically, and a variety of rim widths are being offered, generally in the wider direction of travel.

The UCI maximum rim-depth ruling for road race use has also influenced things. Any rider in a UCI-sanctioned race can only use up to a 65mm deep rim, apparantly a measure to limit speed and improve safety.

DT Swiss launched its revamped ARC 1100 wheels last year, streamlining the third generation range of wheel depths to 55,65 and 85mm and introducing a new wheel shape and specific tyre pairing.

These wheels are the Swiss brand’s aero range toppers and are used by Uno-X in the WorldTour. In fact, wheels from the range have been ridden by the yellow jersey wearer in both the mens and womens's Tour de France this year - a cool stat.

They have also been designed and arrive with a specific tyre pairing; you can buy them pre-fitted with Continental tyres and tubes.

I’ve been testing the 65mm deep version for a few months now. I’ve ridden two road races on them as well as a load of training and general riding, and we’ve taken them to the Silverstone wind tunnel to see how they fared against some of the best road bike wheels right now.

DT Swiss has long carried a ‘quality’ label from cyclists and shops. If you are shopping for a new pair of ‘best’ or race wheels, my own comprehensive test riding, plus our own wind tunnel test results, should help you when it comes to choosing.

Design and aesthetics

The 1100's have a matte carbon fibre rim finish, with some classy silver decals. A silver 'DT Swiss' and 'ARC 1100' on each side, and a red section around the valve hole, perhaps to help make it easier to spot.

The wheels are built around that deep 65mm DT Swiss rim and with DT 180 DICUT hubs with ceramic bearings, which are the brand’s top models. There are 20 spokes in the front, and 24 at the rear with hidden spoke nipples. The spokes themselves are DT Swiss Aerolite II bladed steel ones, not carbon; you will notice.

The rims themselves use a V shape, widening from the spoke bed, and flaring out a little more at about the midpoint of the rim.

The wheels weigh 1559 grams as a pair on my scales, a respectable weight for a 65mm wheelset, but overall wheel weights are dropping so fast that it's starting to be viewed as a little heavier.

The brand now has a carbon-spoked, climbing-oriented wheel, the 38mm-deep ARC 1100 Spline CS model; head that way for carbon spokes.

The wheels have also been designed with a specific pair of tyres in mind and can be purchased pre-fitted with them, which is how my test set arrived. They came fitted with a 30mm Continental GP5000 S TR tyre on the rear, and the brand’s Aero 111 tyre at the front in a 29mm size, which the 22mm internal width has been optimised for. They also arrive with Continental TPU tubes fitted.

The rims are hooked, so there’s no need to check any tyre compatibility charts here. Though the tyres come with Continental tyres and TPU tubes, they do have DT Swiss tubeless tape fitted and tubeless valves included, so you won’t have to re-tape if you do go tubeless.

The hubs use the brand's Ratchet EXP system, and it’s very simple to swap freehub bodies or remove for cleaning. There’s a recording of the freehub sound below; it is on the louder side as freehub bodies go.

On the EXP ratchet, certain units are affected by a premature wear issue. Click the link to see how you can check your own.

The wheels have a 22mm inner rim width and an external width of just over 28mm. The rim itself also has a narrow 'V' profile. In the context of the overall market, will the wheels' overall weight, steel spokes and narrower rim measurements make them less appealing?

Internal and external rim width measurements are growing, and for riders looking to run larger volume tyres, a corresponding inner width may be the way to go. For all-out speed, is a narrower size better?

DT Swiss is in the narrower school of thought with these wheels. The brand argues that increasing inner rim width affects frontal area, a key consideration regarding aerodynamic performance.

According to DT Swiss wind tunnel testing, its V rim shape provides 'the lowest drag measured' as well as ensuring a 'small steering moment' to provide easy and predictable handling in crosswinds, etc. The brand also says the Aero 111 front tyre can help increase the sailing effect at certain Yaw angles, which can help us ride quicker for the same or less effort.

Performance

I've had a very good test period with the ARC 1100's. DT Swiss says this is the wheelset to choose for speed on flatter terrain, and this is where they do seem to excel. I've tested them with a Winspace M6 aero bike, and the Canyon Endurace SLX.

Sitting in the wheels in a road race or swapping off on my local chaingang at 50km/h+ feels very fast, and based on my feel I'd say up and over around 30km/h is where the wheels seem to really come into their own. It feels like they hold and maintain speed very well once moving, and the 65mm deep rims make pretty much any bike look mean; who doesn't love big deep rims?

Whilst they sit at 65mm in depth, I can’t say they are difficult to live with in any way. They perform well across the board. I've felt a couple of pulls in high winds, but generally crosswinds haven't been an issue, which aligns with the brand's claims on minimising steering moments.

No, they aren't as nimble feeling when climbing as a lighter, shallower wheel. But if you are looking at a 65mm wheelset, you are probably focusing on what it can bring to the table on the flat, and that's not what these wheels are for- not a day in the mountains.

That front 29mm Aero 111 tyre paired with the deep front rim can contribute to some harsher feelings at times, particularly compared to a bigger tyre and perhaps a wider rim.

Where I do notice a difference at times is in slow-speed acceleration compared to lighter wheels; the Roval Rapide CLX III wheels do spin up that little bit quicker, especially from very low speed.

On hillier, up-and-down terrain they also don't feel as nippy, and for a hard, hilly day there are better options, but again, these are for speed on the flat first and foremost.

That brings me onto weight in general; whilst these wheels sit at a perfectly acceptable weight for their specs, are they beginning to look a little heavy compared to what else is out there?

The Scope Artech 6.A wheel for the same depth rim comes in at 1307 grams, though they are in the next price bracket up. The 65mm Scribe Élan Ultra 6 wheels also weigh in at 1328 grams for less cash. (They also had similar aero performance in our test)

Lower overall weights provide improved acceleration paired with the aero benefits of a deep rim. There is, however, more to a quality set of wheels than the overall weight number.

The single issue I have had with the wheels related to water, and the habit it has of finding its way into the wheels. Something I have had to do twice is remove the tyre, inner tube and rim tape and empty water out of the rim cavity after riding in the rain. I’ve run these wheels with tubes, so it’s easy to notice the sloshing noise.

The wheels seem quite prone to taking on water, I believe due to the size of the hole at the rim for the hidden spoke nipples. Relatively short wet rides led to sloshing in the rim cavity. This adds weight and potentially unbalances the wheels, but can also lead to corrosion over time. On the hidden nipples, wheel truing will be more involved if it's needed, especially with a tubeless setup.

If you would use the wheels in the rain, and we all get caught in it at some point, check the wheels and drain them ideally each soaking.

You've read my thoughts on the wheels, but we also took them to the Silverstone wind tunnel for our latest CN Labs aero wheel test.

We tested a group of 14 wheelsets and asked the brands to send the fastest UCI-legal wheels they had, with plenty being around the 60-65mm deep range.

One bike was used for the test, without a rider. We tested at a 40km/h wind speed, with the bike's wheels at the same speed, across a range of Yaw angles and with 28 and 30mm tyres.

It's worth reading the entire test; there's so much information and data to look at, but here's the topline. Out of 32 wheelset tests across the two tyre sizes, the ARC 1100's placed eighth overall, and performed better with a 30mm tyre than a 28mm one.

The wheels tested within a watt of the overall winner, the HUNT 5AM Limitless Ti_UD Carbon Spoke, but are heavier and more expensive than that particular model.

In short, the wheels held their own against the competition we tested. The specifics will dictate whether they are right for you.

Value

RRP for these wheels is $3218 / €2499 / £2,599.98. (inc. tyres and tubes). For the UK market, that includes the Continental tubes and tyres I mentioned, which sweetens the deal somewhat; they aren't cheap tyres. That may well be the case for the US and EU too.

The wheels sit at the same price point as the Roval Rapide CLX III, the Parcours Chrono GT (62/65mm) and Reserve 57|64 Turbulent Aero. They are also just a touch more than the new Shimano Dura-Ace C60 wheels.

It's clear there's plenty to choose from at this price point, and I think the fact that good quality tyres are included boosts the value offering; you can pump the tyres up and you're ready to ride.

These are quality wheels that are in line with competitor prices, but I have a feeling the overall weight and lack of carbon spokes may make them less appealing in the premium road wheel top trumps stakes.

Verdict

The ARC 1100's 65s are undeniably fast on flatter terrain. Despite those deep rims, they aren't a handful and can be used for everything, which I have done with them. They are best suited to flat, fast riding, which is where they perform most strongly.

They are optimised for up to a 30mm tyre; if you do want a wider rim for 30mm+ tyre sizes, then they may not be quite what you are looking for with their narrower V-shaped rims.

If you are a speed merchant or are perhaps taking part in flatter road races or fast chaingangs, and want some deep wheels, they are a good choice and have performed very well for me.

For general riding and doing a bit of everything, the lower weight and shallower rims of the ARC 1100 55s would be my choice.

While the company describe themselves as "Europe’s market leader in e-bikes and second largest in bicycle parts and accessories", they own French race bike manufacturer Lapierre, which provides bikes to men’s and women’s WorldTour squads, Picnic-PostNL.

The company has apparently been in trouble for some time, passing ownership to its creditors earlier in the year, but it has been unable to find a way forward.

"Since then, Accell and its advisers have explored every possible avenue for the Group’s future, including discussions with several interested parties, the consideration of multiple offers and seeking regulatory approval for a potential merger," read a company statement.

"Despite these extensive efforts, it has not been possible to reach a viable solution for Accell to continue operations in their current form. Having exhausted all the available options, the directors of the Group have concluded that it is no longer able to meet its financial obligations as they fall due and that initiating local insolvency proceedings of the relevant Group subsidiaries is the necessary next step."

The company’s current status is 'granted suspension of payments’, a situation where it is no longer required to pay its creditors.

"Every realistic option for the future of the business has been tirelessly explored, and none have resulted in a solution to continue the Group in its current form," said company CEO, Jonas Nilsson. "Our immediate focus is to support an orderly process, provide clarity wherever possible, and work with the relevant court-appointed administrators to preserve viable activities and employment where circumstances allow."

As the bike supplier to Team Picnic-PostNL for the last two seasons, Lapierre’s insolvency is sure to affect the team, though they are yet to respond to a request from Cyclingnews.

However, the brand’s UK website directs visitors to a firm of Administrators, and the company’s French website offers a dead link to a press release 'concerning the situation of Lapierre Cycles.’

Other brands owned by Accell include legendary British brand Raleigh, which sponsored top level teams in the 1990s and before. Mountain and gravel bike manufacturer Ghost sponsored an MTB team for many years, but that closed down in March "due to internal focus changes and redirection of the brand".

The websites of both Raleigh and Ghost refer visitors to administrators, with identical messages on both companies' sites.

Other brands affected are Batavus, Sparta, Carqon and Babboe cargo bikes.

The original Roval Rapide CLX wheelset launched back in 2020, at the time joining the CLX 64 models; remember them? Last year, the brand launched the Rapide CLX III, the latest addition to the Rapide range.

The CLX III was rolled out in June last year, along with the Rapide CL III and Rapide CLX Sprint. The wheels shed weight with the introduction of carbon fibre Arris spokes and use a 51mm-deep front wheel with a 48mm-deep rear wheel, in what's occasionally referred to as a 'road mullet' setup.

These wheels are seeing regular action in the WorldTour by various Specialised-sponsored teams, and are generally a popular choice on Specialized models or as a standalone aftermarket choice; to be clear, Roval is a component arm of Specialized.

I’ve been riding them for months, tackling a road race and training on them. We also took them to Silverstone recently to see how they would fare against the best road bike wheels in our CN Labs aero wheel shootout.

Just another stop on the Roval / Specialized hype train, or do these wheels walk it like they talk it? I’ve put in the hard yards to find out.

Design and aesthetics

Carbon fibre spokes and overall wheelset weights seem to dominate conversations at present when it comes to the latest wheelsets. We will cover that, but for me the rim shapes and depths of the CLX III's need talking about first. There's more to a set of wheels than the spoke material and overall weight on the scales.

The CLX III's, like the II's they replaced, employ specific front and rear rim depths. The Rapide II's had a 51mm front and 60mm deep rear; the III's have a 51mm deep front rim and a 48mm rear.

The idea is centred around the Specialized design philosophy of optimising the leading edge, or to put it simply, the front of the bike where aerodynamic performance matters most; the rear wheel can then be made shallower to save weight and aid handling and acceleration. The brand says everything contributes toward aero performance, overall wheelset weight, and crosswind stability.

The rims have a wider, round external profile that is a lot rounder than some wheels with a more traditional 'V' shape, with a more 'normal' internal width.

Internal width for both wheels is 21mm, whilst the front external number is 35mm at the widest point, and 31.3mm at the rear. Even the bead hook widths are specific: 5.5mm at the front, 4.1mm at the rear. Roval calls this the 'Flatstop rim bead' and claims the wider beads help prevent flats if you smash the rim. I haven't tested this specifically; who deliberately rides down potholes? But I haven't punctured whilst testing.

The hub internals are by DT Swiss and use the 180 hub internals with a 36-tooth ratchet system. Spoke count is 18 up front and 24 in the rear, and surprise, these spokes don't come from Vonoa, who provide spokes for a lot of wheel brands right now, but Arris, a US-based firm making composite spokes.

The spokes use titanium end pieces and alloy nipples; four spares are included with the wheels, and they can be manually trued. So need to worry about dealer-only truing procedures.

When it comes to looks, the Rapide III's are a stylish wheelset without overdoing it. The hubs and rims are gloss black, with silver spoke nipples and end pieces at the hub. Two decal versions are available: gloss white (pictured) or 'satin carbon', which gives a stealthy, blacked-out look with black decals.

Performance

During my test period, I’ve used the CLX III’s with two pairs of tyres: the S-Works Turbo TLR tyre, and the newer Cotton TLR models, which pair the Specialized cotton performance into a tubeless-ready package; they are now what you see Remco Evenepoel and his teammates using. Thankfully I’ve encountered zero punctures or sealant sprays in my test period.

I installed both sets of tyres with a track pump, but the process wasn’t completely painless, with some seepage, mess and hesitancy for the tyres to seat and seal first time. The rim profiles of the CLX III’s seem to make things trickier. It certainly wasn’t a disaster, but a little more annoying than I would like.

I’ll get straight to the point: the CLX III’s feel pretty fantastic across the board. I’ve been impressed, and when I have switched back to them from other wheelsets, the point has been reinforced: they are excellent all-rounders.

They accelerate very well from low speeds, and feel fast and reactive when making changes in direction. I felt like I could dart around on them; they are exciting to use.

There’s also a comfort, a kind of softness (I mean this in a good way) from the overall ride quality that I can’t fully put my fingers on; perhaps it comes from the rim shapes, good quality tubeless tyres or just the overall build, but there is almost a luxurious ride feel. We also mentioned this comfort in our Rapide CLX II review.

Get them rolling, and those big white Roval logos start to flick round when you glance down, and they feel very quick, about as quick as anything I’ve used to date, especially with a top quality road tyre fitted.

The pros seem to favour the CLX Sprints for most racing, except perhaps the mountains, but I don’t think there’s a massive amount in it in the real world. I used the wheels for a road race with 32mm Cotton TLR tyres, and they felt fast and poised, cornering excellently and stiff feeling when I followed moves on one of the circuit's climbs. They are also a prime example of how you can have your cake and eat it now when it comes to wheel depth and overall wheelset weight; 1338 grams is nice and light.

There are online comments to the tune of, 'why would you fit a deeper front wheel? Handling will suffer in crosswinds'. That may have been true 10 years ago if you ran something like a narrow 60mm deep front wheel and a 40mm rear, but times have changed, and these wheels with their more modern wider rim shapes do very well in the wind. To an extent it depends on the rider, but poor handling as a result of the mismatched depths is a non-issue, so don't worry on that front.

We also have some wind tunnel data for the CLX III's from our recent CN Labs aero wheel test.

We tested 14 wheelsets around the 60mm depth range, or 'brand's fastest' options, on the same bike at 40 km/h across a range of yaws. We also used the same pair of 28 and 30mm tyres for testing.

In our testing, the CLX III finished in the bottom half of the test group and was faster with a 28mm tyre than they were with a 30mm. The CLX Sprint wheelset was marginally quicker.

There was less than a three-watt difference between a lot of the wheelsets in our test, and rolling resistance and bike and rider differences would account for more than this number in the real world. The CLX III's are a competitive wheelset, despite not making the podium in our test.

Value

$3,399.98 / £2,999.98 / €3,498 is our RRP for the CLX III's. There's plenty to choose from at this price point. The Vision Metron RS are a little more cash; there's the CLX Sprints, of course, and several Zipp wheelsets amongst others.

The wheels have performed brilliantly for me; I really like the ride quality, handling, and my own perception of their speed has been good.

There are wheelsets out there that are cheaper by $ 1000-odd, with similar overall weights and aero performance.

You'll still have to pedal regardless; I don't think you stand to lose out on too much with a cheaper wheelset and great quality tyres.

Verdict

I like the styling, and I really like how these wheels ride.

They tick the carbon spoke box, the overall weight is low, they handle and accelerate well, and they feel fast pretty much everywhere. Throw in that plush ride feel and there isn't too much not to like.

They are excellent all-rounders in my opinion, great for racing and all-round riding thanks to their low weight, but they do sit at the premium end of the market; there's a lot of choice when it comes to wheels, possibly more than there ever has been, but for me the Rapide III is another very good wheelset from Roval.

Yet, just a few short years ago, the debate over disc brakes still raged on. The headlines in 2006 made note when a rider was riding with disc brakes, and inevitably, when riders blamed cuts and gashes on the fast-spinning rotors.

Notably, Pogačar was among the last holdouts in the pro peloton, still using rim brakes long after most other teams had transitioned to discs. Ineos Grenadiers also resisted the change well after other teams succumbed to the inevitable. That provides us with a prominent benchmark against which to measure the dying breaths of the rim brake.

In the 10 years since the UCI allowed a trial period of disc brake use in the pro peloton, these powerful stoppers have become standard equipment. Yet the path to this moment was a rocky one. And the eventual acceptance of disc brakes paved the way for other technologies that were initially met with resistance.

So, to mark a decade since they broke onto the road scene, Cyclingnews asked me to delve deep into the story of how we got here, speaking to riders, mechanics, and product managers who witnessed the shift in real time, and how disc brakes have affected racing since their arrival among the pro ranks.

Carbon Wheels Roll Into a Problem

In the lead-up to the UCI's decision to allow a trial period for disc brakes in the pro peloton, another innovation was causing celebration and headaches. Carbon rims offered weight savings and stiffness benefits. They also presented a new difficulty: how to counteract braking forces on the rim itself and the delamination caused by heat from brake pad contact at high speeds. No one was specifically asking for disc brakes. But almost everyone was looking for a solution.

"Everyone was looking for lighter, more aero rims, but that meant you had to get into carbon," says Dave Lawrence, Road and Gravel Product Manager for Shimano. "That complicated braking surfaces and brake pad compounds. Hearing stories about rainy stages at the Tour, brand new brake pads weren't making it through the stage. So people started thinking about how to make rim brakes more durable, but then you get into noise and vibration. And from the product side, you think, disc brakes will solve that."

Keep in mind this was all happening while tubular tyres were the peloton standard. As brake pads heated the brake track on carbon rims, the tubular glue could soften, which could increase the likelihood of a tyre separating from the rim. It was a sea of potential benefits littered with icebergs of problems.

Carbon wheel manufacturers spent lots of engineering capital to explore potential solutions, from different types of carbon to less brittle and more heat-resistant resins. While progress was quick by engineering standards, the peloton needed faster solutions.

"Frame design, materials, capabilities, wheel technology, and expanding market and ride style evolved exponentially 10 to 15 years ago," says SRAM Road Product Manager Dan Stefiuk. "Yet braking was still archaic and relying – better yet, hoping – that if you squeeze a piece of rubber or cork against aluminium or carbon, it would slow you down predictably."

Behind the scenes, both SRAM and Shimano knew the solution already existed, and had proven itself for years in the cycling world already. "It was across all of the mountain bike world," says Lawrence. "People would come in from other cycling disciplines and say, why don't you use disc brakes here? Gravel was just getting started, and that was the heyday of cyclocross, too. A few renegade brands put disc brakes on their bikes early on, and there was a lot of conversation around that. That's how a lot of trends happen: it wasn't one big moment, but instead a lot of little things that started to build momentum."

Knives, Machetes, Spinning Blades of Death

But momentum can crash hard if the end user isn't on board. The dichotomy of cycling has always been the path brands must navigate to satisfy both hobbyists and pros. While everyday cyclists were quicker to note the advantages of disc brakes, the pro peloton was more skittish about adoption. It didn't take long after the UCI allowed disc brakes in the peloton for the first controversy to arrive.

During Paris-Roubaix in 2016, Fran Ventoso got caught up in a crash and wound up with a deep gash on his leg. He contended that he made contact with a disc brake while still upright and attempting to avoid going down. While it's still unclear all these years later what did or did not cause the gash, Ventoso's reaction stole the headlines.

"Disc brakes should have NEVER arrived into the peloton, not at least as we know them right now," Ventoso wrote in an open letter after the incident. "I haven't met any rider who has run out of braking power with traditional brakes; I haven't known anyone who didn't see his wheels skidding when you brake with all [the] power you've got, no matter traditional or disc brakes. Then: why use them?"

Ventoso's worries were, of course, warranted. No rider wants to be put in any more danger than our inherently dangerous sport already presents. The incident did encourage manufacturers to consider ways to ensure disc brakes and rotors were completely safe to use at high speeds. Ventoso's language was perhaps more flippant than necessary – he calls disc brakes giant knives and machetes later in his letter – but it revealed deep hesitancy among the pro ranks who felt new tech was being foisted upon them without buy-in or rationale. Ventoso's crash led to the UCI suspending its disc brake trial period.

Controversy struck once more in the following year at the 2017 Abu Dhabi Tour. Team Sky's Owain Doull got caught up in a crash with just a kilometre left in the race, and in amongst the wreckage, Doull said he made contact with Marcel Kittel's disc brake. Kittel was the only rider in the race using disc brakes. Like Ventoso, Doull called for disc brakes to be banned or otherwise modified for rider safety. Though Doull's call for rider safety was, once again, very much warranted, video later cast serious doubt on the notion that Doull's injury was caused by a disc brake.

The 'Mixed Brake' Era

It was perhaps the 'not knowing' part that kept the peloton's heels dug in on the matter. Safety is rightly top of mind for both riders and organisers, and adding a technology to the mix that had such huge potential to affect race speeds, braking distances, and even the chaos of crashes was enough to make all parties skittish.

"From inside the peloton, I think there was a bit of scepticism at first along with a worry about safety," says Ruth Edwards (nee Winder), Olympian and staple in the women's peloton during the disc brake era. "People didn't know if you could literally get hurt from the rotor in a crash, and also the difference in braking speeds that could cause crashes."

American cyclist Peter Stetina agrees with his compatriot's view. "There were suddenly two braking speeds in the peloton between teams whose bike sponsors pushed discs or rim brakes.

"That became the blame for some crashes in that first 'mixed brake' season. I remember one crash where a rider had a deep laceration, and everyone blamed the 'hot burning knife blades on our wheels', which were not fit for the mass pile-ups."

Indeed, disc brakes not only changed a rider's ability to stop more effectively, but also the way the peloton moved. Some riders on rim brakes might need more distance to slow down to the same pace as a rider on disc brakes. And riders on the new technology could brake much later before a corner, leading to a change in race dynamics.

From a production side, bike brands had to adapt to new braking forces, new production cycles, and even entirely new frame designs. "Some manufacturers had spent a lot of time developing calliper-based frames," explains Lawrence, "and depending on where you were with your product cycle, if you just came out with a rim brake frame, you may not have had the time or money to make a disc brake frame in that timeline."

Complicating matters further were the many variations in calliper attachment points. Changing those points often meant redesigning a frame and fork entirely, not only to accommodate which calliper the frame could accept, but also the braking forces that came along with it. "Some frames were flat vs post mount, QR vs Thru Axle, 130 vs 142, which all made for inconsistencies," adds Stefiuk.

"Ergonomics were new, and levers were larger than today. But there is no question that disc brakes performed better, more consistently, and were safer than rim brakes, and that benefited experienced pro-riders and brand-new cyclists alike."

And those spinning blades of death? Stefiuk says the industry took a proactive approach to the problem after the early days of disc brake trials in racing and began to mitigate the risk of laceration by rounding the rotor edges.

Stetina recalls another unique disc brake problem: rotor rubbing. In the early days of road disc brakes, the distance between the brake pads and the rotors could vary depending on a lot of factors, including rotor warpage, disc brake fluid heating, poor calliper adjustment, and a myriad of other reasons. It was an audible reminder to riders that this controversial tech didn't feel quite polished to them.

It wasn't just driving the riders crazy. Manufacturers knew they needed to solve niggling problems like these to encourage widespread acceptance. "There was more pad rub than you would have liked in first generations," says Lawrence. "We learned a lot, and we improved the product. We have about 10% more pad clearance compared to the early generations. Our early rotors had more deformation under heavy braking, so you'd get that ticking noise on long descents. And that's gone now."

Frames themselves evolved too. While changes like wider axle widths were downright necessary, a lot of the compromises and design changes manufacturers made to accommodate the braking forces of disc brakes turned out to be a bit of overkill. "At the time, most carbon frame production had transitioned to Taiwan, and frame designers needed to learn how to accommodate disc brakes," Stefiuk says. "To be transparent, some early disc frames relaxed their geometry too much to account for 142mm over-locknut-dimension (OLD), and one way to do so was to make the chainstays noticeably longer. In the mind of an athlete, not only are you giving me disc brakes and a heavier frame, but now I have a frame that does not feel as responsive and doesn't allow me to race the way I want."

Ride any road bike today, and you'll find that responsiveness is back in spades. The learning curve didn't just apply to riders, in other words. Manufacturers found ways to leave most compromises behind.

Unsung Heroes Rolling Their Eyes At Night

It wasn't just riders who bristled against this new tech. Behind every pro rider is a pro mechanic staying up late at night to clean, adjust, repair, and prepare bikes for the next day of racing. Disc brakes presented not only a shift in the way riders attacked races, but also the processes mechanics had to now adjust to keep bikes safe and running perfectly.

"Just like veteran riders, there were mechanics who preceded Indurain at the time that disc brakes were being introduced," says Stefiuk. "Some mechanics welcomed the new technology and saw the benefit of hydraulics and not having to swap cables overnight as they became contaminated from the stage before, while some mechanics still smoked cigarettes with a can of diesel fuel and a paintbrush to clean the drivetrain."

Guys who cut their teeth wrenching bikes when Merckx was a young buck were now being told to adjust – very often in real-time – to tech they were being told could also be dangerous for their riders if they screwed it up.

Lawrence remembers the initial training sessions for those mechanics. "It's funny, depending on the teams, for the older, more traditional mechanics it was one thing after another," says Lawrence. "Electronic shifting, then disc brakes. You had to go in and teach these traditional mechanics how to bleed brakes. I was there in the early days. You talk to the technical directors who are on the cutting edge, and they were the ones who were like, 'oh god, here we go, I have to explain this to my five Belgian mechanics!'"

Both Stefiuk and Lawrence agree that mechanics are the unsung heroes of the peloton, and while they may have met disc brakes with gruff and grumbles, they also met the moment. In the long run, it becomes old hat, and a benefit for those wrenches up late at night preparing for the next day's stage.

Forgetting It Was Ever Controversial

Perhaps it was just succumbing to the inevitable, or maybe it was real improvement and real results that got everyone on board. Either way, disc brakes rule the peloton and rim brakes are now a chapter in cycling history.

"Acceptance from my point of view was just mandatory," says Edwards. "It's what the new bikes at camp had on them. Off you went to go training, and you got used to it. Disc brakes are great. I have a lot of confidence in my stopping power now – not that I remember not having that confidence before. But I wouldn't want to be on rim brakes in a peloton of disc-equipped bikes. Descending definitely feels different; it's just all about learning your speed and what your equipment can do."

From a logistical standpoint, there's no doubt significant improvements in bike changes and setup made a huge impact. Stetina notes that "tech got better, thru-axle design improved, rubbing rotors became less frequent, and it all happened relatively quickly. But in many riders' minds, it wasn't ever fully adopted until a big mountain finish was won on a disc brake bike. After that, there was no valid excuse for the riders anymore. I want to say it was Pogi or [Egan] Bernal winning a five-star stage somewhere, and then we were all like, 'okay, it's here to stay now.'"

Maybe that was all it ever really took: a stunning showcase of superior performance. Feats of man carrying feats of engineering. Isn't that so often how it goes?

High-pressure, mains-powered washers can also strip paint and blast water past critical seals and bearings – potentially wrecking your bike and tanking its resale value when it's time for an upgrade – we are always thinking of an upgrade, right?

I recently discovered the Kärcher OC3 pressure washer, which ticks all the boxes for convenience; it's low pressure, superbly portable, and battery-operated, meaning you can use it anywhere.

It's also at a best-ever price as the Kärcher OC3 pressure washer is discounted to £92.99 on Amazon, a massive 32% off its usual £139.99.

In our Kärcher OC3 pressure washer review, it received a glowing 4.5-star rating with Will Jones saying, "it's so useful I now can’t imagine life without it".

I have to agree with Will; I own the foldable version, which keeps my car interior spotless by blasting crud off my gravel bike right after a ride. It doesn't replace a deep clean, but the 15 minutes of run time and 4-litre water tank (8-litres on the foldable) are more than enough for a quick once-over.

Both models produce the same low-pressure output of 5 bar (72 psi), which is more than enough for bike-related cleaning. The original OC3 is cheaper, but the OC3 Foldable is the newer model, and it has a few key upgrades that, in my opinion, make it better. It has a larger capacity tank and USB-C charging, meaning you can charge it off a power bank or car charger.

It's also collapsible, meaning it takes up even less space for those on the go. Battery run time is the same on both, and the OC3 Foldable can draw water directly from external sources.

Saying that, I use it more at home than my Muc-Off Mobile Pressure Washer, as it's just easier to fill and carry. It comes highly recommended for anyone seeking that convenient, quick bike clean.

These Kärcher deals apply to UK shoppers only, and I've not found any OC3 models on sale at Amazon.

The Muc-Off Mobile Pressure Washer Starter bundle is also a recommended bike-friendly cleaner (although it's not particularly mobile); it's still a great option. The Starter Bundle is discounted to $374.10 on Amazon, in a limited-time deal.

Below are the best Kärcher deals from other retailers, relevant to your location and currency.

Even lightweight bikes like the Scott Addict RC Ultimate are coming equipped with mid-depth wheels, as are all-rounders. It seemed a little against the run of play, then, when Zipp came out with a brand new 202 NSW wheelset earlier this year.

I’ve been using them in a range of really quite hilly environments, as is befitting. Full alpine ascents were scaled, as well as the savage and relentless Cornish coastal roads back at home, mostly aboard the new Cannondale SuperSix Evo, but also aboard the new Cannondale CAAD14 to try and invigorate what is quite a stolid machine as stock. They’re good wheels, but given their quite enormous price tag and some quite lacklustre constituent parts, I can’t really get on board with them with my consumer advice head on.

Design and aesthetics

If you’ve been riding a while, you probably think of shallow tubs when you see the ‘202’ number. While Hunt has produced lightweight tubular wheels in recent years, these are very much modern in terms of their tyre setup: tubeless, and as with Zipp's other options, hookless.

Hookless may not be the most popular thing in the world at the present moment. But the 23mm internal width should mean slightly enhanced compatibility with narrower (read: lighter) tyres than more progressive widths, but it does feel a touch backwards-looking in this day and age when 25mm internal is becoming something approaching the norm.

One thing I do like is that the maximum pressures for a range of widths are printed on the sidewall, so no annoying googling in the garage before the ride. There isn’t, however, a list of approved tyres as with so many other Zipp wheels as yet; I mounted up a set of 30mm Continental GP5000 S TRs (living to tell the tale) and set off into the mountains.

The wheelset comes in at 1,090g, though Zipp does state that this is the 90th percentile weight and that most sets will come in under this weight. On my scales, the pair came in at 1,050g, which is certainly light, but it’s not crazy light, as I’ll get into shortly. Part of this is down to the slightly odd decision to use metal, j-bend spokes which tip the scales at 3.3g each.

While it’s true that not every high-performance wheel uses carbon spokes, they’re definitely the norm on wheelsets that retail for just under £3.400/$4,200/€3,800 as these do. Each of the spokes is in the region of a gram heavier than a carbon counterpart, so for a grand total of 40 spokes (20 front, 20 rear), that’s 40g left on the table, and would have got my wheelset 10g under the kilo mark. Using carbon spokes also normally allows you to reduce the spoke count, which would further reduce the weight.

While we’re on the subject of spokes, Zipp is continuing to use J-bend instead of straight pull. This means the hub flange in general needs to be larger, which creates a slightly heavier hub, but also means a wider angle for the spokes to diverge, as well as a shorter distance for them to traverse, which could have improvements in stiffness.

Speaking to Bristol’s premier wheel guru, Rob Borek, it transpires many brands have switched to straight pull because it makes the hubs cheaper to produce in mass quantities as you need less material, but it also means you can lace them more easily with machines. I don’t personally think there’s any great issue with J-bend or with straight pull spokes. If the wheels are decent and fit your needs and budget, choosing to not go with them because the spokes aren’t straight is quite mad, and at least here you’ll have no worries about non-captive spokes ejecting from the hub under hard impacts.

Inside the hubs there are ceramic bearings as standard, along with a 6-pawl ratchet offering up 66 points of engagement, which for road cycling is plenty, given instant reactivity isn’t nearly so crucial as it is in the world of techy MTB. Mirroring the spokes, the use of pawls rather than a star ratchet feels a little out of keeping with the premium price of these, though it must be said I never had any issues with the engagement itself, and they are mercifully a lot quieter than the alternative, which is bliss when sending down long descents.

Aesthetics is a hard one to call on what is ultimately a pair of black circles, as most wheels are. I do quite like the graphics, which comprise a series of well-placed dash fades that make me think of 1980’s motifs in greyscale. The hubs, though, don't have that same premium aesthetic from a visual standpoint, but I think the most egregious thing is the silver nipples, which cheapen things significantly. There’s nothing different to black ones in terms of performance, really, but they just look out of place on a wheelset at this price.

Performance

I gave the Zipp 202s the best possible start in life with four days in the French Alps after the Dauphiné, including tackling the Col de Sarenne and Alpe d’Huez, plus several white-knuckle descents down the latter to really test their chops. They are, it must be said, an extremely pleasant set of wheels to ride, mounted up to a suitable machine; in my case the new Cannondale SuperSix Evo.

I didn’t have any issues mounting the tyres to the hookless rims. I am personally not overly enamoured with hookless rims for the road, but I do applaud Zipp for at least putting the maximum pressures on the sidewalls to stop me absent-mindedly causing an explosion in the office basement. Both a 28c Specialized Rapidair set and then a set of GP5000s went on with just a track pump (I managed to shred the former set instantly on some comically large shards of glass, it seems), and neither set lost more air than would be expected between rides.

The low weight is a big plus, and whether it was alpine climbs or the relentless, steep ramps on a trip down to Cornwall to raid the coastal roads, I was glad of the low mass. They certainly have that immediacy that is a function of both the weight and the stiffness. They never felt harsh, though. The 30mm rubber likely helps in this regard, but compared to some wheels, especially deeper options, they’re really quite mellow to ride over subpar tarmac, which the UK has in abundance for those of you unfamiliar with what can be charitably called our road network.

On descents is really where they came alive though. That lower rotating mass makes steering with precision a touch easier, and coupled with a reduced susceptibility to buffeting from the wind by virtue of just having a smaller side profile, they’re far less easily blown off course than many deeper options I’ve tried over the years. In hard cornering, whether full hairpins or fast open bends with more flow, they stood up extremely well, offering an extremely composed feel. I know in my head that the faster you go the more aerodynamics matters, and so on descents it’s perhaps even easier to argue the case for a slightly heavier but more aerodynamic wheelset, but I am a staunch believer in not living your riding life purely through the medium of a wattage chart; these feel brilliant on descents and you will have a lot of fun in a far greater range of conditions with them on versus something deep, in general terms.

They do, however, suffer against their deeper counterparts on the flat. The shallower depth will be less aero, but the lower mass also means at higher speeds you don’t have that flywheel feeling. They’re just a bit more of an effort to keep pushing on with on the flat, but you already expected that, didn’t you?

Ultimately, with mid-depth wheels reducing in weight and becoming the norm, the true shallow mountain wheel is now a very special tool, and with the price as it is for these wheels, it’s quite a hard sell if you don’t live somewhere especially mountainous.

Value

The Zipp 202 NSW wheels are really quite eye-wateringly expensive at £3.400/$4,200/€3,800, and I can’t help but feel like Zipp could have done more with these. They’re light, but not as light as some hyperlight options. To make life easier for you, I’ve graphed up a few key lightweight wheelsets, plotting both their quoted weight and their RRP, and these come out amongst the heaviest and the most expensive, which makes them quite a hard sell for a reentry into the lightweight specialised wheel market.

The spokes probably should be carbon at this price and with weight in mind, but make the nipples black to make them look more premium or make them internal to improve the aero package. Give us a new lighter hub just for these or something, maybe?

Verdict

If you live in Chamonix, Bern, Steamboat Springs, or Perranporth and you want a decent set of wheels for up hill and down dale, then these are good, and you will have a good time, especially if you prioritise handling, but you’re going to get more for your money elsewhere. And if your rides don’t look like a Toblerone every time you saddle up, then being realistic these are an awful lot of cash for a wheel that is not going to be ideally suited to your needs.

‘But I’m doing the Marmotte next year and need a wheelset for that!’ I hear you cry. If you’ve got the cash, then fill your boots, but if this is going to be your only wheelset, then I’d suggest going for something more general.

If you're not familiar with these testing write-ups, I can only apologise for the hours you're about to spend nerding out, because below you'll find an extremely deep – approx 10,000 words worth – dive into the results from our latest test.

As ever, we were back at the world-renowned cycling-specific wind tunnel at the Silverstone Sports Engineering Hub, but this time round, we took 16 pairs of the best road bike wheels on the market to see which is the unequivocal aero king.

Aside from the endless tyre swaps required (pray for my thumbs), wheels are a fun thing to test, because the results are largely applicable to most people. Unlike bikes, clothing and helmets, where the real-world difference between two products could vary from user to user based on rider position and body shape, wheels are more or less transferable from the wind tunnel to your bike.

And wheels are an exciting thing to upgrade on your bike. They can make your bike faster, lighter, better handling, nicer to ride, and perhaps most importantly, they make your bike look much cooler.

In recent years, we've seen wheel manufacturers step up their game in offering wheels that are both aero and lightweight. Just five years ago, a 60mm wheel under 1500g was rare, but now anything above 1500g is seen as heavy.

Given you're here, I trust you know the basics; that aero wheels exist at all, their go-faster intentions and that a lightweight wheel is likely better on steeper climbs. After all, this is our third round of wheel testing.

So instead of patronising you with the basics, I'll dive into the wheels we've chosen, the protocol we used to test them, and the all-important results.

But first, allow me a small plug. We have a new YouTube channel, Cyclingnews Tech, which is full of excellent video reviews of road and gravel bikes, most of which we've also tested in the wind tunnel. We will shortly be publishing a behind-the-scenes video from our day in the tunnel, so don't forget to subscribe so it lands in your feed as soon as it goes live.

The wheels

Unlike previous tests, where we've had no real parameters for what constitutes the optimal road wheel, and thus have just gone with aero all-rounders, this time the UCI gave us something to work with.

For the start of the 2026 season, a new rule was introduced stating that anything deeper than 65mm is too fast and thus should be deemed illegal. I won't get into the veracity of those 'too fast' claims, nor their motivations for the rule change, but we chose to set our limit at the same depth.

We asked brands to send the 'fastest UCI-legal wheelset' they had. This was a mix of nominally 'Western' brands, but with a quartet of Chinese brand wheels, courtesy of the kind folks at Panda Podium.

That led to the following list:

• DT Swiss ARC 1100 DICUT
• HUNT 5AM Limitless Ti_UD Carbon Spoke
• Parcours Chrono GT (62/65mm)
• Reserve 57|64 Turbulent Aero
• Roval Rapide CLX III
• Roval Rapide Sprint CLX
• Scope Artech 6.A
• Scribe CORE Ultra 6 (as well as the same wheelset, but with a new aero front hub)
• Scribe Élan Ultra 6 (with the OSL8 crinkled spokes)
• Syncros Capital SL Aero 60
• Vision Metron 60 RS
• CRW Works Ultimo 6060
• Farsports EVO C6
• Pertual ACME 45/62

And finally, as a lightweight what's-the-difference comparison, the incredibly light Arcaris 8848 wheelset, weighing just 904g on our scales.

For clarity, we tried to get hold of the new Enve wheels spotted at the Tour de France, but the brand was unable to get us a set in time. Apparently they'd all gone to some guy called Tadej who had an important race on or something.

We also hoped to test the new Black Inc Hyper 62. We had the wheels, but we failed to get hold of a Shimano freehub body for them. Somehow none of the other 15 wheelsets had an equivalent freehub design that could be swapped over. They're one of a few that use pawls instead of the more common star ratchet.

And we asked nicely for a pair of Shimano's new Dura-Ace wheels, but sadly no stock was available as our test took place before they launched.

Disclaimer

Before we get into the details of the test, a brief interlude to say this article features paid placement from Argon 18, with the loan of the Nitrogen Pro bike, and Continental with the loan of the GP5000 S TR tyres. I personally approved their involvement after concluding it wouldn't offer undue bias, nor perception thereof, to the outcome of the test.

As ever, we paid the standard commercial rate for the hire of the wind tunnel, and the sole purpose of this test was creating impartial data for Cyclingnews readers. Without your support, these tests would not happen, and so ensuring they remain impartial is key to their continued success.

Protocol & confidence

As with previous tests, we took the wheels to the cycling wind tunnel at Silverstone Sports Engineering Hub. The wind tunnel gave us the aero data, and separately we weighed each wheelset and took dozens of measurements alongside.

For the aero testing, each wheelset was mounted to the same bike: an Argon 18 Nitrogen Pro (in size M). Our stipulation here was to use a bike that had no affinity to any of the wheel brands in question, and Argon 18 was a good match, especially with the Nitrogen Pro's aerodynamic intentions.

A Specialized Tarmac, for example, would have been designed in conjunction with the Roval wheels and could, in turn, create an unfair advantage to those wheels. Likewise Cervélo with Reserve, and so on. Argon 18 does make a modified version of Scope's wheels that it claims work better with the Nitrogen Pro frame, but we insisted on testing the off-the-shelf Artech 6.A for fairness.

We tested in a bike-only configuration, rather than with a rider. This is because the error margin that a real rider adds to the equation is bigger than the differences we expected to find. By testing without a rider, we could be much more confident that the differences being found were due to the thing we're trying to test.

To quantify the error margin, we tested the Scope Artech 6.A at the start of the day, then immediately again afterwards, and then again at the end of the day, having taken the tyres off and putting them on again. By calculating the maximum difference between two points in those tests, our error margin equates to +/- 0.27w.

Each wheelset was tested at a wind speed of 40km/h, with wheels spinning at the same speed.

Every wheel was fitted with Continental's GP5000 S TR. Crucially, we tested each wheelset with two different tyre sizes (28mm and 30mm), and we always kept the front tyre on the front and the rear tyre on the rear.

We wanted to ensure that the same tyre (the exact tyre, not just the same model) was tested on every wheel, to remove any potential for different manufacturing tolerances from tyre to tyre affecting the results. We also wanted to avoid 10 minutes of downtime between each test as we swapped the tyre onto the next wheelset, so by adding in a 30mm test to the mix too, we could swap the 30mm tyres onto Wheelset B, while the 28s were being tested on Wheelset A. And then swap the 28s onto Wheelset C while the 30s were being tested on Wheelset B, and so on. This reduced downtime and gave us a second stream of data to boot.

Given the tyres were all box fresh, Will even brought some 120 grit along and sanded them smooth in the morning before we kicked off to remove the release ridge in the centre, and any rough surface was worn down to a consistent smoothness by the powered rollers during the initial zeroing process. We also ensured the same cassette (Shimano 105, 11-34) and rotors (Shimano) were used on every wheelset too.

Each wheel-tyre combo was tested at seven yaw angles: -15, -10, -5, 0, +5, +10 and +15 degrees. Each capture was performed in a sweep in the same direction (negative to positive) for consistency.

With more time, I'd perhaps go more granular here, and to a wider angle, to try and uncover the point at which wheels begin to sail. It's also possible to capture in a moving sweep and see this in real time, but it's much harder to extract an average to establish a best-to-worst ranking.

We also quantified price to help you understand the cost associated with the respective wattage saving. Coupled with our wind tunnel helmet test, our wind tunnel aero bikes test, our tyre tests and all of the upcoming Cyclingnews Labs tests we've got in planning, we want to help our readers decide where to spend their money first to get… well, faster!

And finally, if you'll permit me a moment to boast: In all, we captured in excess of 1,000 data points. This includes 14 CdA values per wheelset, as well as the following list of secondary information.

• Price
• Hooked (yes / no)
• Claimed weight
• Front wheel weight
• Rear wheel weight
• Total weight
• Spoke count front
• Spoke count rear
• Spoke material
• Surface texture
• Taped or blind rims
• Internal v external nipples
• Internal width front
• Internal width rear
• External width front
• External width rear
• Front tyre width (at three points, averaged)
• Rear tyre width (at three points, averaged)

Additional notes

Cyclingnews does not claim that this data is the final word on the aerodynamic performance of the wheels featured, but rather an additional stream of independent, unbiased testing and information for our readers.

The results are simply representative of our testing day and the protocol we used. We hope that being clear about our method and our protocol allows readers to appreciate the data while also understanding the bigger picture of the metrics that affect performance.

We understand that others may achieve different results with different protocols, and that some wheels in this test were designed around different tyre sizes, models, or a specific bike. Where we have information to this end, we will include it.

For simplicity, we will report raw CdA data as it comes out of the wind tunnel software; all data is subject to our error margin, and we will make this clear at important points throughout.

When averaging the CdA from the seven yaw angles, we have weighted according to the 2018 research paper by Cannondale's Nathan Barry. This calculates the likelihood of experiencing each yaw angle at given speeds in the real world and applies an appropriate weighting to each CdA measurement, and thus doing so appropriately provides a more accurate real-world interpretation of which wheelset will actually make you faster.

In layman's terms, as you travel faster, you're more likely to experience low yaw (wind head-on) than high yaw (crosswind), simply by virtue of the speed of your movement through the air. There are many different schools of thought on the correct way to weight each point, but we've used Barry's method for the past two years so will continue to use it for the foreseeable future.

Using these averages, we've then calculated to solve for power (watts) at the tested speeds. These calculations use a constant air density of 1.2kg/m³, and do not factor in additional losses such as drivetrain friction or rolling resistance.

Cyclingnews also understands that there is more to a wheelset's performance than aerodynamics. Weight, handling and stability are key for ride quality, while serviceability, tyre compatibility and retention, and how easy it is to get the tyres on and off are also important. This context should not be ignored when viewing the results below.

Results

For the results, I have calculated the power required to overcome the aerodynamic drag for each product at 40km/h. This figure is comically low compared to what you'll be used to seeing on your head unit, as there's no rider on the bike, but for comparison purposes, it's an accurate and comprehensible way to showcase the results.

I will then show the 'watts saved' vs the lightweight Arcaris 8848 shallow wheelset, as a means to help you understand what you stand to gain if you were to make the same swap.

That's your podium, and notably they are all with 28mm tyres. Satisfyingly, the next three most aero were the same three wheels again, but with the 30mm tyres, albeit Hunt in fourth, Scope in fifth, and Reserve in sixth.

I will go into more detail about each product individually below, but for now, allow me to let the graphs do the heavy lifting.

Below, I've got the raw CdA from each wheelset, presented at each yaw point. I've split out 28mm tyres and 30mm tyres, but as we'll learn later on, it's not always the case that narrower is faster. It's a higgledy mess of purple lines, but if you hover (click if on mobile) on the wheelset you want to see in the legend at the top, it'll highlight it and fade out the others.

For clarity, the line that sits at the top in the two graphs above, away from the others, is the shallow Arcaris 8848 wheelset. The greater the CdA, the more aerodynamic drag is created, essentially confirming what we already know: shallow wheels are slower. They come into their own on steep climbs, though, of course.

Overall rankings

Next up, let's look at the overall rankings.

Each wheelset x tyre size combo is listed, with the calculated power required to overcome the aerodynamic drag that they (and the bike they're mounted on) create. Lower drag means less power is required to travel the same speed, and thus is the more aerodynamic product.

Extrapolated to 50km/h

What about at faster speeds? Such as descending, or the spicy point of a bike race where you're bridging to a break?

The graph above shows a six watt gap between Hunt and the Pertual wheels (best and worst of the aero wheels on test) or 13 watts between the Hunt wheels and the shallow section lightweight wheels.

For clarity the data here is extrapolated from the results at 40km/h, but the comparisons in our 2024 wind tunnel wheel test, where we tested at three different speeds, showed a reasonable correlation between the results at 40 and 50km/h respectively.

Aero vs weight vs price

Now for some deeper analysis, and I'll start where I think most people will start: a comparison of aero vs weight, and then price, and then a combined chart with aero, weight and price in one place. Spoiler alert: there's not much correlation to be found.

Starting with the exact weights of each wheelset in order.

An outright win for the shallow Arcaris 8848, of course, but the Chinese duo of CRW and Pertual claw back some kudos with second and fourth, respectively. Hunt's third place here is the standout performance though, given the 5AM was also top of the aero charts above.

For the next few graphs, I've removed the shallow wheelset from the graphs as they are an obvious outlier that skews the results. We're primarily looking for trends in aero wheels here.

There's an ever-so-slight positive correlation between aero and weight, as well as between aero and price, but the spread of data is so broad in both cases that I don't think anyone can confidently assume that spending more will ensure they get a more aerodynamic product.

And things are no clearer when you factor in weight, too. The Hunt wheels are in the lower half of the price bracket, the second lightest in weight (excl. Arcaris), and most aero on test. And at the opposite end of the spectrum, the Visions are the 3rd most expensive, bottom half of the aero table, and bottom half of the weight table.

There's just no guarantee that spending more gets you a faster product.

Is narrower faster?

Smaller tyres have less of a frontal area, and given that CdA factors in 'Area' (the 'A' portion of CdA, or essentially an item's size), surely narrower tyres are faster... right?

Let's take a look.

Below, I'll start by looking at the aero data for each wheelset x tyre combo, coupling the 28mm and 30mm results together to allow an easy at-a-glance comparison.

For reference, the 'Cd' portion of CdA is the coefficient of drag, or how easily air passes over an item's surface.

Incredibly, nine of the 16 wheelsets (56%) actually returned a better aero performance with the wider (30mm) GP5000 S TR tyre than with the 28mm equivalent.

This is probably because most of them were designed to accommodate the wider tyre, and thus the airflow from tyre to rim was a smoother transition.

Given we know that wider tyres can be run at lower pressures, and thus offer benefits to rolling resistance over rough ground, it's reassuring to know that doesn't necessarily come at an aero loss too. We've already shown that 40mm tyres are faster for most people even despite an aero detriment, but I wonder where the limit is. If a brand can make a wheel work better with a 30mm than a 28mm, can they make 40mm faster than 30mm? What about 50mm or 60mm?

Do bear in mind that all the wheels besides the Syncros are hooked, and so the exact dimensions of the hooks will have some bearing on the measurable internal width with the callipers we had to hand.

Most brands publish the above information, but in the interest of being thorough, we wanted to measure the internal and external width of each rim too.

It's notable how some wheels (Syncros, Roval, Reserve, Hunt) have individual front- and rear- dimensions, whereas others are equal. Of course, the measurement might be a few tenths of a mm out, showing a discrepancy between front and back, but we've shared the data as we measured it.

And the above graph shows every tyre width as measured before it went into the tunnel. We measured each at three equidistant points around the tyre and took an average.

Using the two graphs above, and of course the aero results higher up, you can infer how tyres interact with the rim. If the front tyre is wider or narrower than the rim, and whether the '105% rule' shows itself.

Specifically, Silca's Rule of 105 says that a "rim must be at least 105% the width of the tire if you have any chance of re-capturing airflow from the tire and controlling it."

I've done that below, calculating the ratio between the external width of the front rim and the measured tyre width, and plotting that against the aero performance.

There's no obvious trend showing wheels over 105% are suddenly more aero than those below 105%, but it is perhaps notable that first, second and third place (Hunt, Reserve and Scope) are all very close to that 105% mark, at 107%, 107% and 103% respectively.

And to wrap up this section and conclude without doubt that narrower tyres aren't guaranteed to be more aerodynamic. The below graph shows the correlation (or lack thereof) between the front tyre's measured width and how the wheelset performed in the wind tunnel.

Carbon spokes vs steel

The big topic of discussion lately is carbon spokes vs steel spokes. A wind tunnel test can't answer any questions around safety, but we can at least dig into how they affect the aero and weight credentials of their respective wheelset, so that's what we'll do below.

Although there's a bit of crossover, there is a clear distinction between the weights of carbon-spoked wheels and steel.

There's no obvious correlation between carbon spokes and aero performance, but Hunt's logic is that since carbon is stiffer and stronger, fewer of them are needed, and that aids both their aerodynamics and their weight. The 5AM wheelset feature just 15 spokes up front and 18 at the rear.

That doesn't bear out in all cases, though. Pertual's Acme 45/62 have just 16 both front and rear, and they were one of the slowest on test.

The other question that crossed my mind when putting this feature together is whether internal (hidden) spokes are faster than external. It's fairly well accepted that hidden nipples are faster, all else being equal, but our data showed no correlation, presumably a result of a too-small sample size with too many different rim shapes and depths.

Individual results

To order this section, I'll work my way down the rankings from fastest to slowest, grouping together results from 28mm and 30mm as I go, rather than duplicating a load of the details.

HUNT 5AM Limitless Ti_UD Carbon Spoke

An impressive result for Hunt, whose wheels not only land at the top of the tree as well as the individual tables if we were to split 28mm and 30mm tyres into separate tests, but they're also some of the lightest on test.

We've all heard the saying "fast, light, cheap - pick two," but Hunt challenges that too. The 5AM, at £1999, are £1840 less than the most expensive pair here. Cheaper models do exist, especially if you look at the Chinese cohort, but by our data, Hunt nailed the brief here.

One of the standout things with the Hunt wheels is their minimal spoke count. Carbon spokes are stiffer and stronger, so Hunt says you don't need as many to make a wheel of equal ride quality and power transfer. Fewer things getting buffeted around by the wind is logically less draggy, and it's also lighter, so a win-win.

Reserve 57|64 Turbulent Aero

My big takeaway about the Reserve wheels is that the 57 | 64 are a darn sight easier to get tyres on to and off of than the 52 | 63 we tested last time. Their hooked rim is accompanied by a ridge that locks the tyre into place on the bead for safety, and oh boy were they tough to unseat last time, but the update has seemingly improved this.

Also, when we first tested wheels in the wind tunnel in 2023, Reserve's 65 | 50 were slowest on test. To have turned that around and been within the error margin of the win is a huge credit to the brand.

Scope Artech 6.A

Scope's Artech 6.A won our test last time around and are within the error margin of victory this time, which is similarly impressive to the Hunt result given their weight is 5th best at 1307g.

The 'thing' with Scope, however, is they're pretty darn pricey compared to the others here. At £3,498, they're the second most expensive on test. Those fishscales do look cool though.

I would like to test the standard Artech 6 at some point, since we've twice now tested the 6.A, which is technically an all-road wheel, albeit designed more around wider tyres.

Syncros Capital SL Aero 60

The runner-up in our last test, the Capital SL Aero 60 wheels are the best-of-the-rest here, in seventh place in the combined table (Hunt, Reserve and Scope claimed the podium with 28mm tyres and then also swept up fourth, fifth and sixth with 30mm tyres).

Interestingly, they were actually faster with the 30mm tyres than 28mm, which might seem unusual but is actually more common among the wheels we tested than the other way around.

Their biggest standout feature is the moulded spokes, which help keep their weight down and seemingly help their aero performance too. But with carbon spokes becoming a more common solution, it's now possible to get lighter wheels without the risk of writing off the whole wheel with a broken spoke.

They're also the most expensive on test, more than three times the price of others here.

DT Swiss ARC 1100 DICUT

My standout impression of the DT Swiss Arc 1100 is that they're incredibly narrow. They look narrow, with a sharper V-shaped leading edge to the rim, rather than the more U-shaped profile we've become accustomed to in recent years. They also measure up narrower than all others on test, at an external rim width of 28.29mm up front.

Roval Rapide Sprint CLX

Like the Hunt wheels up top, the Roval Rapide Sprint CLX are a 'mullet' wheel, with a deeper wheel at the front and a shallower wheel at the back. Since airflow is cleanest at the front of the bike, it makes sense to put the more aero product there, and then use a shallower wheel at the back, where aero differences are less significant, and enjoy the weight savings that it offers.

The biggest standout here is that despite having an average internal- and external width, both Roval wheels shaped the tyres narrower compared to everyone else. The 28mm tyre blew up here to 28.65mm (smaller than all others on test) while the 30mm measured at 30.43mm (only the Rapide CLX III was narrower). In both cases, that's almost 2mm narrower than the Reserve wheels, although I suppose in Specialized's defence, it is at least the most accurate reflection of what's written on the sidewall of the tyre.

Scribe Élan Ultra 6 (OSL8)

The Élan wheel from Northern Irish brand Scribe is famous for one thing... crinkled spokes. They are carbon, aero-bladed, and remind me of my sister's hair in the '90s.

Scribe says the Core Ultra 6 (below) is actually the more aero product, but our data puts them really close, with the Élan edging ahead (albeit within the error margin of the test). Given these are over 200g lighter, though, they're probably doing enough to justify their £500 higher price.

Scribe CORE Ultra 6

Alongside the Élan, the Core Ultra 6 is the cheaper, more 'basic' wheelset with steel, J-bend spokes (although the nipples are hidden inside the rim).

We were also sent an extra front wheel with a new hub that the Scribe team had developed for its pro athletes, designed to work well at lower yaw. In our test, the differences - if any - were well within the margin of the test and therefore indistinguishable.

In fact, with both sets of tyres, the CdA was exactly the same (measured to four significant figures) no matter if we used the aero hub or the standard hub.

Parcours Chrono GT (62/65mm)

Parcours' Chrono GT are perhaps undersold by sitting in the bottom half of our results here (and it must be said that they're still only 1.55w behind Hunt).

But one of the interesting claims made by the British brand is that due to the vibration-absorbent nature of the carbon being used, they are equivalent (in comfort terms) to another wheel running 10-15psi lower tyre pressure.

Vision Metron 60 RS CS Edition