Would Tadej Pogačar win on a bike from 10 years ago? Luke Rowe says 'no chance'

There's no denying that bikes have come a long way over the past decade, thanks in no small part to the industry's broader understanding of physics.

The importance of wind- and rolling-resistance – and the relatively reduced importance placed on weight – has led to everything getting more aerodynamic, frames getting stiffer yet more comfortable, tyres rolling more easily, and ultimately, riders getting faster.

Concurrently, and coincidentally, Tadej Pogačar has risen to prominence, and after yet another dominant season, in which he won his fourth Tour de France, he's widely touted as the greatest cyclist of all time.

Latest Videos From

But when posed with the question of whether Pogačar would win on an older bike, Luke Rowe gave a resounding, unwavering, "no chance."

Speaking on the Watts Occurring podcast with his co-host Geraint Thomas, the former Ineos Grenadiers road captain said, "It's got to the point with aero bikes, they can get them to that weight where they can race aero bikes on mountain stages. I've seen some of the numbers, these things in wind tunnels compared to what we used to ride, [the differences] are huge.

"You're constantly getting them aero gains. If you were to put someone like Pogi on a bike from six to eight years ago. Huge gap. The advancement that bikes have made in the past five to eight years is huge."

Thomas held a slightly more measured view, considering the entire rider-and-bike package, rather than the bike alone.

"I think if it's just the bike, and he had the modern wheels, tyres, skinsuits and stuff, he probably could [win]. But if he had the whole package from 2015 - 10 years ago - the wheels that Froomey had, the tyres, the bike, the kit, it would be interesting then."

"He's got that much of a buffer these days, though. It would make it a more level playing field," continued the 2018 Tour de France winner, before joking, "Maybe that could be a UCI rule."

Staunch in his view, Rowe reiterated his point, but not without adding a caveat that acknowledged Pogačar's dominance.

"I'm gonna say he wouldn't win. Maybe if you put him at the bottom of a climb on a bike, mano a mano, he could win a 10k climb, but the accumulation of fatigue over every stage.

"Stage 1, say it's flat, his average power would be 15-20 watts higher. The accumulation through 21 days, I think [that] would crack him.

"Pogi would not win a bike from 10 years ago. Or even eight years ago. Even five years ago."

The difference a decade makes

The closest, most applicable test we've seen that compares old kit vs new kit was performed by Sonny Colbrelli and his then team, Bahrain Victorious. It compared a 2023 setup against 2013, the early 2000s, and the late '80s, courtesy of a Bahrain Victorious setup complete with a 2023 Merida Scultura, skinsuit and aero helmet; a 2013 Pinarello Dogma 65.1 from Movistar, paired with Team Sky Adidas kit, tubs and rim brakes; Damiano Cunego's Cannondale Six13 from his time at Saeco, complete with Mavic Ksyrium wheels and Kappa clothing; and a Carrera Podium, downtube shifters and helmet cover.

It found that at 300 watts, the 2023 Merida Scultura – not even Merida's most aero bike – was around 2km/h faster than the Carrera, and faster still than the Cannondale.

Most pertinently to Rowe's argument, though, the new setup required 30 fewer watts to hold 40km/h than the 2013 setup.

On the climb, the results were closer, and the error margin greater, but the raw data showed that the 2023 setup required around four fewer watts to hold 18km/h than the 2013 setup.

Where are the biggest savings made?

Cyclingnews has spent countless hours in wind tunnels, rolling resistance labs, and other facilities over the past few years, trying to answer this question.

In our aero bike wind tunnel test, we found that switching from an entry-level 2015 Trek Emonda ALR to a high-end aero bike can save you 27 watts at typical road race speeds of 40km/h. The difference between two high-end race bikes a decade apart is, therefore, unlikely to be that big, but that's the bike alone, not including the tyres, clothing, helmet, socks, and even the progression in rider position.

In our road tyre rolling resistance test, we unearthed a difference of 30 watts between the fastest and slowest tyres, or a still-significant 17 watts between two nominal 'race' tyres.

We also found that the best aero helmets can be as many as 7 watts more efficient than their non-aero counterparts in our wind tunnel helmet test, and that's without testing helmets from a decade ago.

Similarly, when testing clothing, we found the difference between high-end race kit and a nominally 'cheap' comparison could be as many as 18 watts.

With all that in mind, and returning to the above discussion, it's hard to disagree with Rowe when he labels the difference as "huge." In fact, the 15-20 watts he quotes actually looks quite conservative.

"The more you think about it, no chance. It's advanced too much," Rowe concluded, before Thomas concurred.

"I don't think he'd win the Tour against Jonas if he had the whole kit like that."