Bike manufacturer Canyon has issued multiple stop ride notices this week, covering the triathlon, mountain, and e-bike categories.

The Speedmax CF sold with the V21 aero stem is one such bike. Owners of these bikes, sold by Canyon in the U.S. up through April of this year, should “immediately stop use of your bike and do not ride it until you have had your fork checked and fixed by a professional bike mechanic,” according to emails sent to owners.

According to the email sent by Canyon, “we discovered rare instances where the fork steerer tube can crack or break, leading to a detachment of the cockpit assembly (stem and handlebar), mostly after a harsh impact such as hitting a deep pothole or another similar stress event. This might lead to a fall or in severe cases also an injury depending on the situation and the environmental conditions you are riding in.”

The Speedmax CFR and CF SLX are unaffected by this notice, as are Speedmax CF bikes sold after April 2024 with the new, single piece carbon cockpit.

Owners should expect remedies to start being available in December, with Canyon stating that they will cover the cost of repair.

Canyon also has issued stop ride notices for their Spectral:ON CF and CFR bikes, as well as the Torque:ON CF, as the battery casing / housing could catch fire.

The post Canyon Issues Multiple Stop Ride Notices, Including Speedmax CF first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

It’s that fun time of year again when we get to count up the results of the Kona count, share the data, and put our opinions next to it.

Once again, Zipp owns the most significant piece of the wheel count pie. And they did it with very little help from others.

Here is the data for wheels from the 2024 Kona bike count.

This count gives us a total of 1972 wheels that were countable from our expert counters. The missing wheels are 100% non-identifiable wheels and the fifty-ish pros that we do not put into the count. I would like to note that the two superstar ladies who counted wheels are the best in the business. So if the two of them couldn’t figure out the wheel as it went by… well, it is what it is.

Now, with that disclaimer, we can all probably agree that with the law of averages, the count is what it is, and if you disagree. Please let me know if you would like to help next time we really do have a great time.

Here are my quick thoughts on the data. DT Swiss, who came in 2nd place, has made the intelligent choice to attach themselves to Canyon and others. These OEM partnerships paid huge dividends by putting wheels on bikes. But it also tells me that customers like the wheels, because as we know: the dudes spend big money on bikes. Just look at ZIPP. They have minimal OEM partnerships with Triathlon bike brands and continue to lead, so people continue replacing OEM specs with ZIPP wheels, although that lead is shrinking from years past.

HED had massive success with the count this year, and much of that is due to the continued success of the rear “Non-disc,” but almost a disc Hed Jet 180. The wheel was brought to life within 2 months of the 2022 two-day Kona race and, in 2024, there were 48 riders using the 180. That total alone is better than 17 of the wheel companies present. The wheel also set the new Kona Bike course record under Sam Laidlow in 3:57:22. Looking at this wheel, I’m starting to think the rule of no discs at Kona is time for a revisit.

Bontrager was in the mix in 4th, but it surprises me as we had 338 Treks, and considering they currently only spec Bontrager wheels and have for a while, this means the Speed Concepts are either older, many guys are jumping ship for other wheel brands, or they are buying frames alone and building up their own components.

ENVE rounded out the World Championship podium in 5th. The company lost a lot of its OEM business and volume numbers when it went into the bike manufacturer business years ago. However, it is on its way back to a healthy return to its roots in triathlon and rebuilding its D-to-C and OEM wheel business. We have more stories about that coming up. We shall see what happens with its efforts in the coming years. Having had many conversations with the brand, I can say that they are committed to the cause.

The biggest loser of the day was Shimano, which I find sad. Mainly because they genuinely have a better product than most people ahead of them. But when you turn your back on marketing to the people, sales, or the lack thereof, starts to follow. This also could be that Shimano has yet to bring wheels into the D to C market like most of these other companies, and with the triathlon market going heavily D to C, this may be something for them to really consider as dealers aren’t helping. Still, with all the nay sayers with hookless, they are one of the very few large companies making pure hooked carbon fiber wheels. It’s a little odd that a company with such a large market cap is neck and neck with Profile Design in the wheel department.

The post ZIPP Owns The Wheel Count of Kona 2024 first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

Canyon has won the Men’s Ironman World Championship bike count for the second year in a row. This shows that the company’s marketing engine doesn’t just reach Europe.

Photo Credit Talbot Cox

The post Canyon Wins Kona 2024 Bike Count first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

We stopped some of the top gravel pros before they ventured onto tomorrow’s race course for Life Time’s Big Sugar event.

ISABEL KING

Frame – Scott Addict Gravel RC

Drivetrain – Shimano GRX 2x 48/31

Wheels – Shimano GRX WH-RX880

Tires– 45 Panaracer X1 plus

Power – 4iii

Personal touch

Daily Reminders

CHASE WARK

Frame – Lauf Seigla

Tires – Continental Race Kings 2.2”

Cockpit – Vision Metron 5d ACR integrated 3k

Wheels – HED Emporia

Drivetrain – Sram Quarq 1x 48

HEATHER JACKSON

Frame – Canyon Grail CFR

Drivetrain – Shimano Mix Dura-ace 50-34 / GRX(wants the power)

Grips – Shimano GRX

Moto – Dirt Brigade

Cockpit – Canyon Grail custom

Tires – IRC Boken 45c

Alexey Vermeulen

Frame – Enve MOG

Drivetrain – Shimano Mix Dura-ace 50-34 / GRX(wants the power)

Grips – Shimano GRX

Tires – Kenda rush 2.2 up front, Kenda prototype 50mm rear

Cockpit – Enve SES AR One-Piece

Custom – #noflats

The post The Many Bikes of Big Sugar first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

The fans of off-road racing have seen an exhilarating season unfold, showing off the grit and determination of elite athletes as they push their limits. With the culmination of the Lifetime Grand Prix approaching, anticipation builds for the final showdown in Bentonville, Arkansas. 

In its third iteration, the best 4 out of 7 points series started off this year’s Grand Prix showcased an impressive lineup of 60 elite off-road athletes—30 men and 30 women—competing across six races for the coveted equally paid out prize purse of $300,000. The season kicked off in April at the iconic Sea Otter event in Monterey, California, featuring a challenging 100k mountain bike race. This was followed by UNBOUND Gravel, With Crusher in the Tushar being canceled due to wildfires the series became a best of 3 with, Leadville Trail 100 MTB, Chequmegon MTB Fest, The Rad Dirt Fest, and culminates this weekend in Bentonville, Arkansas, with the Big Sugar Classic—a grueling 100-mile gravel race. While the top spots on the podium for top prize money and glory have already been claimed by defending champ Keegan Swenson, Sofia Gomez looks to be the victor (pending participation on Saturday) . With the end of the season approaching and substantial stakes on the line, the dusty roads of the Ozarks promise an exhilarating showdown.

On the women’s front, 2022 Lifetime Big Sugar champion Paige Onweller has made a remarkable comeback from an early-season injury, currently holding second place in the series with 90 points, just one point ahead of Alexis Skarda. Haley Smith, the 2021 Lifetime Grand Prix Women’s Champion, sits in fifth place overall with 83 points.

A huge talking point coming out of Unbound Gravel was the historic nine women sprint finish where Paige took third overall in the elite women. The women’s only race format of a delayed start after the men, and a ~30 minute gap to the start gun of the general field, has now been reproduced at Lifetime events and other races around the country as they discovered the opportunities it provided for a cleaner and fairer women’s race. 

While Sofia has clinched her win (if she starts the race on Saturday), the rest of the podium is up for grabs. With Hannah Otto coming off an illness that prohibited her from racing The Rad, she’s now had back to back drop races in the last two events- but even with those two drops, she is now sitting in 6th… Which just goes to show how this upcoming race could shake up the current leaderboard. 

On the men’s side, Keegan Swenson has already clinched the series win with an impressive 105 points after winning 4 of the 5 events so far. Among the top ten contenders are well-known athletes like Payson McElveen who is currently in second place, 2024 Unbound champion Lachlan Morton, and the Traka360 champion Peter Stetina.

For Keegan, the only race in the series so far that he took a loss at, was Unbound. There, Lachlan Morton edged out of a two men sprint over Chad Haga. Lachlan now sits 5th going into the final event, and only eight points back from Payson McElveen. For those not yet on the leaderboard, but looking at a step on the podium, they may have a chance. Dylan Johnson sits only two points back from tenth place contender, Torbjorn Andre Roed, the 2023 Big Sugar champion.

The Big Sugar Classic serves as the ideal finale to encapsulate the season. Spanning 105 miles of rugged, dusty gravel roads that wind into Southern Missouri, the course presents a relentless challenge with 7,000 feet of elevation gain. While the race itself is sure to be fiercely contested, the event transcends mere competition. With a two-day expo, a kids’ crit, and a Gravel Rave kicking off the off-season festivities after the sun sets on race day, Big Sugar stands as a shining celebration of community, the hard work of the past season, and the enduring passion that drives these athletes in their sport.

This year has offered these athletes more opportunities and races than ever, with many recently competing in the UCI Gravel Worlds Championships in Belgium on October 5th and 6th, and Ranxo Gravel in Spain just last weekend. The combination of a rigorous stateside schedule and international travel have these competitors undoubtedly ready for a well-deserved break… But the ground work is already being laid for next year. The applications for the 2025 Lifetime Grand Prix are open, although next year’s rendition will look a little different. The field will be limited to 50 athletes (25 men and 25 women) with six wild card spots to be handed out after the second event of the year, and features changes in the event line-up.

For now, all eyes are on Bentonville as these men and women give it their all, for the last time this season, in hopes of climbing up the steps of the podium- not only for this one event, but for the season as a whole in the Lifetime Grand Prix Series.  

The post Big Sugar, the 2024 Lifetime Series Closer first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

Every time we do the old famous Bike Count, it requires a lot of things and a lot of skilled people, all of whom are either volunteers or “voluntold” to do so. These fine humans, the day before the biggest race of the year, get to (instead of planning and resting up for the hectic day to come) hang out in the sun and spend hours hyper-focused on counting bikes, wheels, pedals, power meters, etc. So for about 8 hours, they and we get to catch up and try to have some fun doing it. And without these people, the count would never happen. I’m convinced that the bike count is the real reason we have the famous TGINR Party.

The count’s history goes back some 20 years. And because of that, the tools matched and have evolved with the times. They used to have clipboards, pens, paper, and sheets that looked like this.

The day would be filled with frantic counting and making sure you could catch a pee break without missing numbers. Then, everyone would gather around as we started counting the chicken scratch. Wet pieces of paper with ink all over were effectively turned into totals and then turned into percentages. Then, that was turned into data records and new articles. It was indeed a product of passion.

And for the most part, it was a somewhat bulletproof system (because of the people, not the process). Time passed, and the people who knew how to do it stopped going to Kona. Ironman was, at times, challenging to work with on access, and then all of a sudden, in 2022, we had two counts to do: Wednesday’s count for Thursday’s race, and Friday’s count for Saturday’s race, and the whole history of data was different. I left the massive 2-day adventure in 2022 and started to think on how we collectively do this more effectively. Starting last year, not only did we have a count that doubled in location, but it was 100% gender-specific and also geographically inspired.

For Kona 2023, I showed up with digital form links that allowed people to kill the paper and the manual counting. Ironman gave us a dedicated wifi access point with our own password, so those who wanted to use the digital form did what they did best: stared at their phones, clicked away, and then left 5 mins after they were done. Meanwhile the software spit out the results. We still had some of the “OG’S” that wanted to use pen and paper, so they counted in analog and we hung out after and helped tally the numbers. And by the skin of our teeth, we had our annual bike count. And 2023 was the most odd set of numbers from the norm we had ever seen. Why? Because for the first time in the history of the bike count, it was 100% gender specific, we could now start to understand what men and women valued most regarding their bike equipment.

About 4 months ago I really wanted to make the bike count a big thing again. We all did: the media, the industry, and, of course, our readers. So we went all in on it and committed to the process and committed to making it happen. Now it’s no secret that Nice isn’t as popular as Kona; everything about that race is just smaller. From the expo to the number of participants to, well, everything. That also rings true for the people that are willing (and can) do the count right. Only a few people on planet earth are willing to stand around for 6-8 hours that can actually see what type of saddle someone is riding and be able to record that in the 1-2 secs they have to do it in.

So we needed to tighten up what we knew we could do from a person counting perspective, but also, we needed to look at the data and figure out anything we needed to cut. As in, data that simply doesn’t matter anymore, or isn’t relevant. Looking back at the decisions we made for the count, we likely made mistakes on two things (maybe more, but these stick out). First, rim versus disc brake counts, and secondly, we shouldn’t have killed Merida from the bike count, even though they can’t really be sold in the US.

Consoldation = new important catagory

Now, as for removing bike brands — the dead bikes. What is a dead bike, you might ask? They made up about 5.2% of the total bike count at the World Championship in Nice. When looking at how we could do the bike count better, we realized we had to streamline things. Remember: less options = more accurate count. Looking at the data, bikes have the widest variety with 38 options of bike brands on the original count list. We felt that 11 of those shouldn’t be included anymore. Why? These are companies that, although they might still be in business, their focus has changed. TT or triathlon bikes are either not part of their consumer offerings, or they simply don’t focus on it anymore. This saves the counter time and energy, but it also creates a new and important category: dead bikes.

Those brands we decided to no longer include are:

1. Kuota
2. Fuji
3. Merida
4. Boardman
5. Guru
6. Garneau
7. Kestrel
8. Cipollini
9. Planet X
10. Stevens
11. Blue

Now I know that Cipollini makes TT bikes, and Merida makes both a TT and triathlon bike, but the count of each has never really been meaningful to the totals. But after some additional information, I will put Merida back in for Kona.

Why does this matter? It matters because it shows us the unique purchasing choices of men and women. And after Kona we will be able to start to dive into that little bit more. But the fact that people are riding (as a whole) more bikes combined that aren’t even in our business anymore, versus some of the bike companies that are investing heavily into the endurance space is something to talk about.

Let’s take, for example, Cube. We have four times as many women riding bikes that are from companies no longer in business (at all) or in business in triathlon and are, at minimum, 4-6 years old, versus choosing to ride the bike that 2023 World Champion Lucy Charles-Barclay is riding and has been talking about for years now. Why is that? What is Cube doing wrong with its messaging, or design, for women? If we want women to be successful in this sport (which we do), we collectively have to be working towards helping them in a more significant way. And now one way we can do is within the data of the bike count.

With the ongoing relationship we have with tech and Ironman, we will be able to do more with less. That also means we’ll be able to cover more data and trends. We are also hoping this process, that as we refine it, anyone can use it for other races. We as well as other media outlets are looking forward to getting to Kona for what will be the first year where the combined resources will have data from both men’s and women’s races. And we’ll also have complete data, for the first time, after venues have flipped for each gender.

What will change? What will look the same? And we learned a lot from our first live count article, and we have that all sorted too.

The post 20+ Years of IMWC Bike Counts: What’s Changing, and the New Dead Bikes of Nice and Kona first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

If this story sounds familiar, hi, I’m the problem, it’s me. As noted in my article about this year’s IRONMAN Lake Placid, I managed to move my completion ratio for 140.6 distance events below the Mendoza line. One wrong step while running seemingly had blown the back half of my leg apart.

As it turns out, well, that wasn’t true. It had nothing to do with running at all. In fact, it had everything to do with cycling — and, really, just one very critical component of cycling. One that I, a fifteen year veteran of our sport, and nearly twenty years in the business of our sport, had completely overlooked.

It was my saddle.

You’re probably asking, “oh, come on Ryan. Just how bad of a problem can you create for yourself with the wrong saddle.” The answer is this wrong, from my MRI report: oblique linear low signal right inferior ramus compatible with nondisplaced fracture. Adjacent marrow edema superior rami fracture appreciated. Relatively localized high signal within the adductor minimus and ischiocavernosus muscles, adjacent to the fracture suggest contusion or strain.

For those who don’t speak radiology reports: I broke my pelvis in one place, I had a stress fracture in another place, and I had a lot of swelling / fluid in the hamstring and adductor, along with a strain of both muscles. Go big or go home.

And after talking with my orthopedic team, we narrowed down the source of the injury to one specific item. One that I consistently ignored some of the warning signs of. One that I just kept saying, “oh, it’s just part of riding. It’s never truly comfortable.” One that I rode for mile after uncomfortable mile, and figuring it was all down to the price we pay for biking 4-5 times a week for months on end.

Again: it was my saddle.

Hindsight being 20/20, I’d say I first started noticing that the saddle was really uncomfortable at what turned into my fracture site around February — five months before the race. As I wrote in some of my articles leading up to IRONMAN Lake Placid this year, almost all of my bike training occurred indoors, with my trainer bike and Wahoo KICKR. As rides got longer, my discomfort increased; I tried different shorts and new chamois cream, but never touched the saddle (a Bontrager road one that came stock on the trainer bike).

There is a reason why a friend of mine calls me “dazzlingly incompetent.”

We don’t think of bike saddles as something that can go disastrously wrong. But, as a reminder: your saddle is really only one of three places where your body comes in contact with a bike. And if any one of those is wrong, the rest of your bike fit is a series of compromises. As it turns out, an improper bike saddle can go severely wrong; that pressure onto the pubic rami wound up putting a stress fracture into both ends of the bone. Then me attempting to run on it pulled the inferior part of it apart into a full-blown fracture — that’s when it felt like someone had shot me in the back of the leg.

Let’s not forget: I work in the industry. I have countless good saddles at my disposal, from the ISM PS 2.0 that was on my triathlon bike (and gave me zero problems during the 112 miles at Lake Placid) to the Fizik Argo on my gravel bike or literally anything else (like the excellent WOVE saddle pictured below). But it points to a much larger trend that we’ve been alluding to over the past two years looking at the World Championships bike count: we seem to have lost the plot on bike fit and technology.

Look through the bike racks of your next triathlon and you will see plenty of newer bikes with what can only be described as compromised set-ups. Whether that’s interesting stem or bar choices, or saddles pointed toward the ground, or athletes still not utilizing their aerobars, it all comes back to fit not being placed at the front end of the decision-making process. Fit has to come back to the forefront — the thing you do before you even consider what bike you might be purchasing.

Or don’t. And perhaps you too can join me on the sidelines, cursing yourself for not being smart enough to just change your saddle.

Photos: Rob Piperno / Kelly Burns Gallagher / WOVE Bike

The post A Case Study on the Importance of Saddles first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

When looking at what is happening at the top level of the sport, it’s clear that aerobars, tires, and where you put your water bottles are the new hype in the worlds of aero and bike geek (and for good reason). At the IRONMAN World Championships this year in Nice, we learned that almost 60% of pro women used “other” aero bars rather than manufacturers’ stock aero bars. Don’t worry; we will reveal those “others” in my next article. But for a moment, I want to pose a couple of questions that could help us figure out what this could mean.

#1. Do we have a bunch of pro athletes who are sponsored by aerobar companies and not bike companies?

#2 Are bike companies moving away from integrated aerobars?

#3 If so, who is going to pick up the slack?

If the pros are moving away from the integrated bars that bike manufacturer provides, what are they doing? Looking at the “other” bars, they aren’t cheap, as I would give them an average of about $1,500 for each setup (rough ballpark figure). Some of the standard names like 51 Speedshop, Wattshop, and Drag2zero are all on that list. We couldn’t ask the pros if they got all this stuff for free or if they paid for it (we will in Kona, though). What we do know is that they are moving away from “standard”

Moving away from pros and into age group racers at Nice, we learned that about 13.4% of the field didn’t have aero bars at all. They were simply on drop bars, aka road bikes, only.

Thanks to feedback in the Forum about how a couple of people hate pie charts. I made sure I created a really special one for you

Knowing what I do about aerobars, it raises a few more questions: Was it a lack of knowledge about either the course or aerobars generally? Did they not feel comfortable? Was the cost of entry too high, or was it too hard to figure out all together? What was the reason that over 100 women chose to ride their bikes at the IRONMAN World Championships without the comfort and aero advantage of an aero bar?

Behold another unique pie chart.

We also learned that in the ranks of aero bar choices, Profile Design took the win in the count with 31.5% of all bikes with aero bars.

Do you want to know who came in at #2? drop bars / no aero bar, that’s right. Profile Design not only had the highest % of age group athletes using their aerobars, the next closest competitor did not beat out athletes not using a bar at all.

In the world of endurance sports, sadly many companies come and go — so much so that we killed about eight bike brands from the count this year, because while they may have had 1-4 bikes in the count, the companies themselves are not even around anymore to talk about. Since I have been in the sport (23 years now), Profile Design has always been present. They have had highs and lows, but their presence in aerobars have been their constant. And you can see that consistency as they haven’t lost the top position in the good old famous Bike Count since the start. Why is that? One could probably say it’s because of a lot of different reasons, but for the sake of where we are going with this, I’m going to stick to a couple.

#1 They have always made a decent product for the masses.

#2 They are good at OEM.

While heavy, Profile has always had a good entry-level offering. What makes them good? They are simple and use simple tooling. They have over 25 plus years of experience with customers and their issues that they put into each one of their designs and this new set up is no different.

With a bar length of 340mm, according to Profile Design, the end-user has 100mm of measured adjustability with reach.

Ergo+ Armrests with 10mm pads come with five vertical and three horizontal adjustability points. All of which have plenty of wiggle room for micro-adjustments: 80 in total, if you want to get geeky.

With a rise of 137mm, you are left with a very comfortable 52-degree grip angle

The armrest can be installed behind the handlebars, allowing for easier installation and hand placement.

All in all, this setup took me about 10 minutes to put on my bike. It came mostly put together and was super easy to adjust.

Also plenty of room for all your dashboard computers

One thing that I really did not like was the 6Nm suggested bar clamp pressure. One must be very careful with what handlebars you attach these to. I will need to get out some carbon grip gel and try out a carbon bar with 5Nm at some point.

If 60% of pro women racing at the top level in the world are going out of their way to get a better, more comfortable aerobar then what is currently being offered to them on a stock bike, then we really should be figuring out how we can help improve the experience for the 13.5% of women who chose not to even use an aero bar at the World Championship. There are many companies out there that have great offerings on aero bars. But at $200, this new offering from Profile just might be the gateway to improving ride experience for athletes from the World Championships to just entering into our sport.

You can find more information about this new bar set up here.

The post Profile Design Neosonic/Ergo+/52GMR: The Perfect Entry-Level Aerobar? first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

The two most interesting shifts in corporate strategy within what we can acceptably call the “fitness” industry have occurred at Garmin and SRAM, both of which have embraced Apple’s “ecosystem” approach to product development. I wrote about Garmin’s shift previously, and alluded to the similar shift that SRAM has undergone over that same time. SRAM certainly no longer resembles the SRAM of 2006/07, when the first RED groupset was introduced. But perhaps even more interestingly, SRAM is increasingly diverging in important ways from Shimano. Di2 is a “feature” of certain Shimano groupsets. AXS is a foundational pillar of everything that SRAM does. Some of this is possible because, like Garmin, SRAM has acquired many of the pieces of its ecosystem. Shimano has always been loathe to grow through acquisition, and its only acquisition in recent memory – of Pearl Izumi – likely did little to convince it to change in that regard. But SRAM has basically acquired almost all of what we think of today as “SRAM.” Sachs (chains) in 1997, RockShox (suspension) in 2002, Truvativ (cranks and BBs) and Avid (brakes) in 2004, Zipp in 2007, and Quarq – their most important acquisition – in 2011. Numerous more acquisitions have followed, some of which I didn’t even know about (Velotron and Shockwiz; the latter of which I didn’t realize was an independent company).

The Quarq acquisition was, to me, the most important, not because of the product, but because of the people. In particular, Jim Meyer, Quarq’s founder. Jim is now the “Director of Digital Product” at SRAM. And, at this point, there’s less that isn’t digital in SRAM’s offering than is. Digital is everything to SRAM. The AXS mobile app serves as an important hub, especially with the number of batteries in the system. And those products that aren’t digital should be generally viewed as “not yet.” Flight Attendant – the latest RockShox advancement that combines power data and real time shock tuning (see SRAM’s 2018 acquisition of ShockWiz) to modify your suspension in real time. Brakes are currently the only complete system that has no electronic component, and while I don’t see wireless and hoseless brakes arriving anytime soon – your brakes not working because your battery is dead is not really a viable option, it’s certainly not impossible; especially for TT brakes, a wireless master cylinder would open up quite a few interesting frame options… 

This systemic approach to product design sometimes requires partner buy-in. The AXS Transmission – currently only found on Eagle MTB drivetrains, but which is surely coming to Road and Gravel at some point – needed frame manufacturers to adopt the UDH (Universal Derailleur Hanger) standard. But SRAM mostly owns all the requisite pieces now to fully design a system that never requires – or, in some cases, even allows for – the end user to leave their ecosystem.

As important as Zipp was an acquisition, giving SRAM both a world class domestic composites manufacturing team and facility as well as a major distribution hub – the majority of SRAM’s US inventory now leaves from Zipp’s Indiana HQ, it had largely remained separate from this systemic approach to design. Zipp wheels largely existed in the “old fashioned” world of cycling, where most parts were fairly interchangeable. That’s starting to change a bit, with Zipp-specific variants of Quarq’s TyreWiz coming standard on certain Zipp MTB wheels. But the most dramatic changes are the most recent ones – the introduction of Zipp’s new Vector tires manufactured by Goodyear and Zipp’s Ride Ready program, designed to get those tires and wheels (and SRAM cassettes and Avid rotors) straight into the hands of their customers.

The Ride Ready program speaks to the degree to which SRAM has become a software company. While it’s a fairly straightforward shopping cart app, it’s more that SRAM sees Ride Ready as yet another way that software can enable their customers and bring them into – or further into – the SRAM ecosystem. But really, it’s the Vector tire line that highlights the degree to which SRAM has become an ecosystem company most of all. Ride Ready only really makes sense because of everything SRAM can offer to the end user – the perfect-match Vector tires, the ability to provide relevant tire pressure information to users via the AXS app and website, the central location of the Indianapolis warehouse allowing them to add sealant to the wheels and tires immediately before shipping, and to add additional configuration options in response to user demand in a matter of days – if not hours. I spoke about the Ride Ready program with Ride Ready program manager Mike Vittorio and wheel product manager Nathan Schickel, who has been at Zipp for almost 20 years and with whom I worked on a number of products – including Zipp’s Vuka Stealth aerobar – when I was sponsored by them. 

The Goodyear Partnership

While Zipp could have introduced such a program earlier, the partnership with Goodyear makes that proposition make much more sense, because it’s really hard to tell this story effectively without tires. These are tires that are wholly optimized for Zipp’s wheels, and also makes it more congruous with the larger thrust of SRAMs evolution as a company. It’s not that Zipp is sending you complete wheels. It’s that they are sending you a system that they have optimized for you. I asked Zipp if they imagine a specific tire for every wheel in their lineup. I expected the answer to be, “No.” But it was a resounding, “Yes Absolutely.” Every wheel can have a tire – or tires (the 303 has both a 30mm and 35mm option, for example) – optimized specifically for its width, depth, and overall shape along with intended usage. Zipp calls this Total System Efficiency. The recently introduced 303XPLR demonstrates this in dramatic fashion, with its massive 32mm internal width, introduced unsurprisingly alongside a new Goodyear gravel tire meant specifically for this wheel. That wheelset was available via Ride Ready the day that it launched. 

The partnership with Goodyear is also helping Zipp emphasize that Total System Efficiency applies not only to what Zipp has traditionally been known for – aerodynamics – but also what riders are increasingly concerned with, namely rolling resistance (Crr) and grip. Grip, especially, is one of those things that I think is too often an afterthought. But grip is the thing that I appreciate most of all when I’m actually riding. Tires that grip well are just that much more fun to ride. By partnering with Goodyear, Zipp was able to create tires that are aerodynamically optimal – the 30mm variant of the Vector is understandably faster than the 35mm variant of the Vector, but each tire is optimized for its width and for the wheel. But Zipp is also clearly trying to shift away, at least ever so slightly from trying to assess their wheels by any single metric. The system is fastest. As a whole. Zipp did clarify that even if tires are optimized for specific wheels, the measured differences are quite small. L3GION has been riding the 30R NSW tires on their 454s with great success.

The tires being “generally good” is an explicit design choice. In the pro tour, teams will typically have four different tires – a Classics tire, a Road Race tire, a Time Trial tire, and a Rain tire. The SW series is designed to fill both the Classics and, critically, the Rain tire at once. In particular, the larger size option gives teams much more flexibility for say, a wet and cobbled course, arguably the most challenging conditions imaginable. That these same tires happen to also be quite aerodynamic is a bonus. Zipp has yet to introduce a TT specific tire – I’d imagine that will come with the 858 and, likely, a dedicated rear for the Super9. But even just being able to use the same tire for Classics and Rain is a huge win. While I didn’t get to test out wet weather grip – I do love California summers!, I am also not sure how much I really would want to push the envelope here in pursuit of journalistic excellence. I’m happy to take Zipp’s word for it, especially given how good the dry grip is. Grip is a consistent story, and possibly the first time I can remember really hearing about how important it is, though I can say that my race tire of choice for most of my pro career – the Specialized Turbo Cotton – had superb grip along with incredible Crr, something that more than made up for slightly less than ideal aerodynamics. That same story – that the tire needs to do everything well, even if it gives up a bit in one particular area – was something Zipp’s product management team kept coming back to.

In one example, the Vector NSW gives up 3w in Crr (on average, across a range of road surfaces) to the Continental GP5000 but gains back 2w in aerodynamics (on average, across a range of yaws). If you note that Continental still comes out ahead by 1w in this case, you’re right. But that’s where Zipp focuses on durability – race tires don’t need to be bombproof, but they cannot be fragile – and especially on grip, which is a function of both the rubber and the shape of the tread cap and also the structure of the sidewall plies, both of which are explicitly designed to be optimal when mounted on Zipp’s wheels. I also expect that Goodyear’s casings will improve over time, leading to a reduction in Crr. Goodyear knows rubber. Zipp knows aerodynamics. So it’s not surprising the tires shine in these areas. But bicycle specific tire casings take time, and Goodyear is certainly playing some amount of catch up here to Vittoria and Continental, the current leaders in low Crr casings. 

The rubber – Goodyear calls it “Dynamic UHP Rubber” and you will also find variants of it on their car tires – is a highlight. Especially with the massive footprint of a wide tire at low pressure, I found myself having to re-learn how fast I could take some of the corners I’ve taken countless times on some of my regular routes. I’ve found myself riding these tires more like I ride my mountain bike, leaning the bike way over – much more than I ever would have thought appropriate on a road bike. I haven’t yet put enough miles on these wheels to really put meaningful wear on the tires, but after a few hundred miles, they still look as new. Not a single nick or cut. And I certainly haven’t babied them. Especially if you live somewhere that has less than ideal pavement, these tires are truly superb for training. Even some of the roughest stretches of road – of which there are fewer and fewer, thanks infrastructure! – were very muted. Pure slicks are never going to be great off-road tires, but low pressure and the resulting large contact patch makes for tires that are very capable on any kind of fire road. This setup is perfect for any sort of “all road” race, which was my hope and expectation.

Nathan said Zipp first started speaking with Goodyear in 2020/2021. Zipp had been working with Hutchinson previously on tires like the RT28 and the Tangente G40 gravel tire. These were good tires, but Zipp thought they could be better, in particular in the way that they could optimize the system as a whole. Nathan said that Zipp briefly considered trying to do tires themselves, but the cost of an adequate tire factory to achieve their standards would likely have cost more than Zipp itself is worth as a business. Partnering just made more sense, and in particular, partnering with Goodyear made a lot of sense. In a contrast with what had been the development process to date, where Zipp would provide a list of requirements and manufacturers (Zipp has worked with both Vittoria, who made Zipp’s first ever Tangente tires, and Hutchinson on their tires) would come back some months later with the tire that they believed met those requirements, the process with Goodyear was much more iterative. They tried multiple casings during development, eventually settling on one that worked the best across all metrics. Tubeless technology has certainly made puncture resistance less of a concern, but tire durability still matters. I found it especially interesting that even though Goodyear is only very recently focusing on tires, they have a dedicated factory that only does bike tires. And this is actually quite unique in the industry. Continental, for example, makes its bike tires in the same factories where it makes car tires. This focus on cycling was an important differentiator for Zipp, and it was a key part of why they felt they were able to do so much iterative development.

Tire collaborations are heavily informed by automotive precedence. The Vector tires are, fundamentally, Goodyear tires. Goodyear owns the IP. But it is designed specifically for Zipp’s wheels. In automotive parlance, this is called a “fitment series.” Car makers will approach a tire manufacturer to make an OEM tire to spec. That tire can obviously be run on any car that takes a tire in that same size. But the particular compound, tread pattern, et cetera will all be designed to fit the wants of a given car. In this case, because Goodyear is still relatively new to cycling, Zipp led on the aerodynamics. Notably, Nathan said with these latest wheels and tires, Zipp has effectively managed to eliminate stall at any realistically achievable yaw angle – even very extreme ones. He pointed to extensive crosswind testing that Zipp had done on the Queen K highway in Kona to get a sense of just how extreme yaw angles could get. With wider rims and tires, hookless rims, and tire casings designed specifically for those rims, the aerodynamics package is just that much more stable at high yaw, which leads to both faster speeds and better handling. This was the early promise of the Firecrest wheelset when it was first introduced, but it has taken tires to fully realize its potential.

The Ride Ready Experience

Walking through the entire Ride Ready process, I selected the Zipp 303 paired with the 35mm Vector SW tire. The 303 is Zipp’s do it all wheel, and at roughly half the price of the 353 NSW ($2381 with a slightly heavier 1270 – Force – level cassette vs $4770 with a top of the line 1290 – RED – level cassette), it’s a much more compelling offering. Is the 353 faster? I’d say almost certainly yes. But as with the early Zed-tech wheels, I’ve always thought it was really a very marginal pickup for a relatively high cost increase. The variable cross section NSW rims are substantially more complex to manufacture, so the cost is not unwarranted. I love Zipp’s regular wheels – and have ridden nothing else since 2008 – and have never found them wanting. I can unequivocally recommend the 303s. They are just fantastic wheels. I’d have a harder time recommending the 353s as a do-it-all-wheelset at the premium price. Especially on this site. The 303s are more likely to be your do it all wheelset for mixed-road races, training, and certainly are very capable race wheels. But for this site’s audience, if I was to ever recommend an NSW wheel, it would almost certainly be the 858 where the additional crosswind stability and aerodynamic speed of the variable cross section rim is likely to be more compelling to those folks on the margin. I never rode an NSW in my decade long tenure as a Zipp athlete, as when they were introduced, it was firstly as a rim-brake-only wheelset and I had just made the switch to what was – at the time – an outlier riding disc brakes for the last year of my pro career. 

The setup I selected – 303 with Vector SW 35 – is what I consider the perfect Belgian Waffle setup. The iconic Belgian Waffle Ride – now series of rides – challenges expectations about what a road bike is capable of. I did the original BWR in 2018 on a set of Zipp’s new-at-the-time Tangente 28s, which measured at 30mm on the 303s at the time – with hooked rims, unlike the hookless variant offered currently. I rode them at 60psi front/rear, which was fine, but I definitely was much more nervous on the dirt than I would have been on the Vector 35s at 45psi/48psi. While it’s impossible to effectively simulate what it’s like to race something like BWR, I did quite enjoy being able to ride on the shoulder equally easily whether it was dirt or asphalt during testing. I did need to put on my own 10-44 cassette – that cassette, whether in 1×12 or the 10-46 1×13 variant – is really the perfect do it all cassette. I was a bit surprised Zipp didn’t offer this as a part of Ride Ready, but they also said that they hadn’t really thought about rides like BWR when setting up the Ride Ready offerings. They were quick to point out, however, that if there was sufficient demand, adding the 10-44 (12s) or 10-46 (13s) offerings to the 303 wheelset was something that could be done in a matter of hours, done on a computer in an upstairs office and able to be implemented immediately on the assembly line downstairs – those cassettes are already in stock in the Indianapolis warehouse adjacent to the Zipp factory. This was when I realized that the wheels you buy really are built for you. There were some other options I would like to see – brass nipples for one; I’ve never understood why people have traded the durability of brass nipples for the weight savings of aluminum ones, but that’s admittedly the start of a long tangent. I also was surprised to not see any rotor options – I normally ran 140mm/140mm rotors, which is admittedly non-standard, but that came from riding 24mm tires when I first got on disc brakes, and I felt 160s were too easy to lock up. But 160mm-fr/140mm-rr is pretty standard, but that wasn’t an option. 160/160 was the only option, though again, these are options that could be added easily.

The tires are filled with OrangeSeal, because Zipp has found that to be the most reliable sealant. While Zipp advertises that all you need to do when you get the wheels is to bed in the rotors, in my experience that does assume that you are already running those exact same rotors. In my case, I had to switch the mounting brackets for my calipers from 140mm → 160mm. But based on historical experience, I’d also say you will – if you’re not running SRAM’s Paceline rotors already – also need to deal with rotor alignment. Disc caliper tolerances are such that different rotors and different hub shells can cause some small amount of rubbing. I wouldn’t say this is necessarily a given – certainly the pro tour races all manage to have neutral wheel support without issue, but I also wouldn’t be surprised if a little bit of tweaking was required, especially if you are coming from non-Zipp wheels and non-SRAM rotors. Both because I was changing from Zipp → Zipp and because I had to completely remount my brakes to switch from 140 → 160 mm rotors, I can’t offer any direct experience here as to whether or not pumping up the tires was all I had to do. But certainly avoiding dealing with the mess of sealant and mounting tires was a welcome relief. The wheels came to me with just under 30psi in them. Not quite enough to ride, but certainly enough that there was no worry of sealant leaking around the bead. 

Sealant functionality and longevity tends to be inversely proportional. Orange Seal can be expected to last at least three months, and maybe as long as six depending on weather. But I also know that most tubeless riders are less diligent than they maybe should be about replenishing sealant. Some never do. And because flats are just generally less of a problem with tubeless, this is probably fine. The particulars of sealants are certainly well outside the scope of this article, except to say that Orange Seal is a very good sealant. And since the sealant is applied literally within days of you receiving your wheels, you can be confident that it will last as long as possible.

While there were some additional options I would have liked, I did appreciate the simplicity of picking a wheel and then choosing a tire, selecting yes for rotors, and then picking from either of two cassette sizes in two “tiers” (Force or RED equivalent). From there it was the very standard Shop.com checkout process – Zipp gave me a coupon code to cover the cost of the wheelset for this article – and the wheels showed up about three days later.

Unboxing the wheels, I was impressed with just how seamless the transition from tire to wheel is. It’s hard, even in pictures, to appreciate how perfectly the tire mates to the rim. And, of course, the aerodynamic story is something is essentially something you have to take on faith. But you can have that much more confidence in it because of the one big problem SRAM solves for you – tire pressure. I suspect because of changes to the wheels over time and a desire to avoid an overly long dropdown list, SRAM still makes you pick the bead type and the bead width rather than allowing you to pick a specific Zipp wheel. But you do get in addition to the generic casing options two specific ones for the Vector tires. This is where the system comes into play. Rather than picking a generic and rather subjective “casing” for your tire, you just specify which specific Goodyear Vector model you have. And then SRAM’s tire pressure guide – available both on the web and in the AXS app – gives you the exact pressure for your setup and riding style. In my case, that ended up being 45psi in the front and 48psi in the rear. Like most – probably all – “correct” tire pressures, this feels much too low, especially if you have any real experience riding on 21mm (or skinnier) tires at 120psi+. But then you get out of the road and forget about it and worry less about the quality of pavement or even if the road is pavement.

Ride Ready’s simplicity is an integral part of the narrative around Total System Efficiency. Engineering concepts like Crr and CdA are things that riders increasingly understand conceptually, but they are still difficult to parse out while riding. According to Schickel, tires always should have been wider and run at lower pressure. It really took disc brakes to really unlock that possibility. Hookless tubeless rims have helped make the experience better. But there’s still a battle against psychology – what “feels” fast (high-pressures) is typically the opposite of what actually is fast. Even on the track, pressures as much as half of what was typical are the norm, because a wood velodrome is often not quite as smooth as it would appear. As with aerodynamics a decade or two ago, convincing cyclists that “smooth is fast” remains an ongoing challenge. I think that’s where the focus on grip can help. It’s much easier to feel how much more grip you have with a big contact patch than it is to “feel” lower rolling resistance. It’s also just more fun.

Zipp has always tried to do a good job of informing their potential customers. They are a company that believes that a well informed customer will appreciate the benefit of Zipp wheels and will feel better about paying their premium price. But that process still asked a lot of customers, especially given that mounting and seating tubeless tires can be a major pain. I’ve never needed anything but a floor pump with my tubeless road wheels, but I do have an air compressor to make the process that much easier. Dealing with sealant is absolutely a nuisance. With tires that Zipp can confidently say are the best all around tires for their wheels, they’ve made the process that much simpler for end users, and in doing so, they provide a compelling case for joining the SRAM ecosystem. As with the new Transmission drivetrains – which do away with limit screws and a B-gap screw, using technology to make cyclists live simpler is the end goal. As the famous da Vinci saying goes, “simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.”

The post Zipp Ride Ready first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

Now, just a reminder: to play the game, a rider must finish the race.

Equipment trends

• While Cervelo had the most bikes, Canyon took the fastest time
• Pro’s chose Shimano over SRAM, yet chose ceramicspeed over regular derailleurs
• Favero Assioma took the pedal count within the top 10
• No one in the top 10 was riding 1x
• Aerobars are no longer “Stock”

Big steep hills, fast steep descents

With an elevation gain of +8,895 ft and loss of -8,877 ft, the Championship course took a toll on some, yet 8 of these ladies ended up in the top 10 overall. Let’s start with some crazy facts from the GPX file provided by IRONMAN.

CLIMBS

With eight sections that qualified as a “climb,” athletes saw max grades over 20%

1. 6.1 mi 1,081 ft 3.6%: Starting mile 6.2 – avg grade of 3.6% and Max grade of 9.7 %
2. 0.9 mi 151 ft 2.7%: Starting mile 17.9 – avg grade 2.7% and max grade 8.1%
3. 11.5 mi 3,206 ft 4.9%: Starting mile 25.1 – avg grade 4.9% and max grade 23.3%
4. 1.1 mi 187 ft 3.2%: Starting mile 39.1 – avg grade 3.2% and max grade 4.1%
5. 0.6 mi 106 ft 3.1%: Starting mile 43.9 – avg grade 3.1% and max grade 4.4%
6. 1.7 mi 358 ft 4.2%: Starting mile 48.2 – avg grade 4.2% and max grade 8.6%
7. 4.1 mi 1,066 ft 4.8%: Starting mile 75.8 – avg grade 4.8% and max grade 7.6%
8. 1.1 mi 203 ft 3.1%: Starting mile 90.3 – avg grade 3.1% and max grade 5.1%

DESCENTS

With seven sections that qualified worthy of a “descent,” athletes saw max grades of -12.1%

1. 4.2 mi 687 ft -2.7% Starting mile 20.9 – avg grade -2.7% and max grade -4.4%
2. 1.4 mi 268 ft -3.1% Starting mile 40.2 – avg grade -2.6% and max grade -4.5%
3. 1.2 mi 391 ft -6.1%: Starting mile 53.5 – avg grade -5.9% and max grade -8.6%
4. 7.1 mi 1,774 ft -5.5%: Starting mile 68.7 – avg grade -5.5% and max grade -12.1%
5. 0.9 mi 147 ft -3.8%: Starting mile 79.9 – avg grade -3.8% and max grade -4.7%
6. 7.7 mi 1,766 ft -3.9%: Starting mile 82.3 – avg grade -3.9% and max grade -9.4%
7. 10.4 mi 1,950 ft -2.9%: Starting mile 91.7 – avg grade -2.9% and max grade -10.8%

#1 Laura Philipp: 5:02:25

• Speed Machine: Canyon Speedmax CFR
• Drivetrain: Shimano with SRM
• Aerobars: Canyon Custom
• Wheels: Swissside Disc / 800 front
• Pedals: Wahoo Aero
• Ceramicspeed rear hanger: Yes

#2 Kat Matthews: 5:05:46

• Speed Machine: Canyon Speedmax CFR
• Drivetrain: Shimano 2x
• Aerobars: Canyon Custom
• Wheels: DT Swiss Disc, 1100mm front
• Pedals: Wahoo Aero
• Ceramicspeed rear hanger: Yes

#3 Marjolaine Pierré: 5:12:27

• Speed Machine: Cervelo P5 (2019 Model)
• Drivetrain: Sram 2x
• Aerobars: Stock
• Wheels: DT Swiss ARC 1100 Disc / Arc 110 front
• Pedals: Favero Assioma
• Ceramicspeed rear hanger: Yes

#4 Chelsea Sodaro: 5:15:14

• Speed Machine: Pinnarello Bolide
• Drivetrain: Shimano 2x with SRM Crank
• Aerobars: Most
• Wheels: DT Swiss ARC 1100 Disc / Arc 110 front
• Pedals: Shimano
• Ceramicspeed rear hanger: Yes

#5 Nikki Bartlett: 5:17:42

• Speed Machine: Cervelo P5 (2019)
• Drivetrain: Shimano 2x w/Rotor Crank
• Aerobars: Drag 2 Zero
• Wheels: Rolf Prima Disc / Rolf Prima EOS front
• Pedals: Look Keo
• Ceramicspeed rear hanger: No

#6 Marta Sanchez: 5:18:00

• Speed Machine: Cervleo p5 (2019)
• Drivetrain: Shimano 2x
• Aerobars: Custom
• Wheels: Hed Disc/ Speedsix Ultra light front
• Pedals: Favero Assioma
• Ceramicspeed rear hanger: Yes

#7 Penny Slater: 5:18:36

• Speed Machine: TREK Speed Concept
• Drivetrain: Sram 2x
• Aerobars: Drag 2 Zero
• Wheels: DT Swiss ARC 1100 Disc / Arc 110 front
• Pedals: Shimano
• Ceramicspeed rear hanger: No

#8 Lotte Wilms: 5:22:02

• Speed Machine: Strorck Zeitjaeger
• Drivetrain: Shimano 2x
• Aerobars: Sync Aerobar One
• Wheels:  Xentis Mark4 5-spoke
• Pedals: Favero Assioma
• Ceramicspeed rear hanger: No

#9 Merle Brunnèe: 5:23:44

• Speed Machine: CUBE Aerium
• Drivetrain: Shimano 2x / Rotor Crank
• Aerobars: 3D printed
• Wheels: Citec disc/ 83 Front
• Pedals: Favero Assioma
• Ceramicspeed rear hanger: No

#10 Daniela Bleymehl: 5:23:50

• Speed Machine: Scott Plasma 6
• Drivetrain: Shimano SRM
• Aerobars: Rad Sport Ibet
• Wheels: Princeton Blur 633 Disc Wake 6560 Front
• Pedals: Shimano
• Ceramicspeed rear hanger: Yes

The post IMWC Nice: Women’s Top 10 Finishing Bike Splits first appeared on Slowtwitch News.