Schwalbe has published its thoughts on 32in tyres and unveiled a more affordable version of its gravel tyre range

At just 17, Benjamn Noval Jr. is one of the standout names in Spanish youth cycling. National champion on the road, in mountain bike and cyclocross, the Asturian embodies the modern multi-discipline rider and already has a guaranteed step up to the pros in 2027 with INEOS Grenadiers, one of the mos...

When people compare two things that really dont warrant comparison because theyre inherently different, we call this apples and oranges. But why? Theyre both fruits, theyre both handy snacks, and you may very well find yourself contemplating the crisper drawer or your local fruit boy trying to decide between the two:[Im not sure hes got any oranges in there but whatever.]So its perfectly reasonable to compare the relative merits of apples versus oranges. Its not like youre comparing apples with engine oil filters or feline de-worming medications. Hey, when reaching for a piece of fruit, why not make an informed choice?Oranges excel in Vitamin C, folate, and hydration, while apples offer more fiber (especially in the skin), Vitamin K, and slightly more calories/sugar per serving, though both are healthy, low-fat choices rich in antioxidants, potassium, and minerals, with oranges generally lower in calories and carbs. Choose oranges for immune support and hydration; choose apples for digestive health and satiety.Thanks, popular search engine!I also found myself comparing apples and oranges this past weekend. Heres the apple:And heres the orange:In my ongoing quest for the Spirit of Gravel I find myself asking two questions over and over again, and they are:What is gravel?Why do we need a special bike for it?Fortunately the answer to the first question is easy:And so is the answer to the second question:We dont.Still, all of this raises a third question:So if we dont need special bikes for gravel, then whats the best non-gravel bike for gravel?This of course is highly suggestive, so I can only answer it in the context of my own vast velocipedal holdings, which until the PRJCT GRVL bike came along did not include an actual gravel bike. And while I have multiple bicycles that are very much at home on the wide variety of terrain youll encounter in between the road and the mountain bike trail, the one I keep coming back to when making comparisons with the PRJCT GRVL bike is the Jones. I suppose this is because the Jones has all the modern features youll find on most gravel bikes, such as disc brakes and thru-axles and a single-ring drivetrain with wide range gearing and lots of places to attach bottles and bags for the overnight adventures Ill never undertake, yet at the same time it defies all the tedious gravel sub-categoriesor really any categoryand is meant to do pretty much everything.Also, theyre both black.Last week Id taken the PRJCT GRVL bike on a ride that included both road and gravel segments, as well as a detour through the forbidding Trails Behind The Mall, and so I figured Id do the same thing on the Jones. Heres how they compare:On The RoadWhen I moved to upstate New York City in 2012 and was able to ride to mountain bike trails instead of driving to them, my offroad rides grew longer and longer. I soon realized I needed a mountain bike handlebar with more hand positions, which eventually led me to the Jones bar, and so taken was I with with it and plus-sized tires and all the rest of it that I committed to riding nothing but a Jones bar-equipped bike for an entire yearand failed. (This was before I had an actual Jones and was riding a Jones-ified Marin Pine Mountain.)Then came the Rivendae and with them a deep appreciation for the comfort of swept-back bars, and I wondered if maybe it was time for me to renounce drop bars entirely:However, in retrospect this was the zeal of the converted. I still love both the Jones bar and the swept bar on the Platypus as much as I always did. But if if Im riding entirely on paved roads over longer distances I still prefer a drop barideally attached to a road bike, which could be anything from the chubby-tired Roadini to a skinny-tired race bike depending on my mood.The PRJCT GRVL bike is not a road bike replacement. Slick tires would make it a little more roadish, but even then it only accepts a single 40-tooth chainring. So for a road-only ride I wouldnt choose it over a road bikethough I would choose it over the Jones, mainly since it has the drop bars. I realize there are people who dislike drop bars even on the road, and as someone who has come to embrace other forms of bars I certainly. I doubt the PRJCT GRVL bike is inherently faster than the Jones on the road, and if youre a non-drop bar person then the Jones could very well be the better road bike for you. (Plus, unlike the PRJCT GRVL bike you can even set the Jones up with a double crank.) Yet clearly I am fundamentally a drop bar person (a droppie, which I think should replace the term roadie going forward) so for road riding I have to give it to PRJCT GRVL, sorry.On The GarvelThis ones more complicated. See we all know what the road is. But what is gravel?Oh, right, I keep forgetting.Anyway, for the purposes of our discussion, lets say gravel is anything from thisto this:While drop bars are more or less a requirement for me on the road, I dont really miss them on so-called gravel, and the closer said gravel gets to the second picture the less I miss them. The biggest difference here is that the Jones can roll smoothly at high speed over the terrain in that second photo, while the PRJCT GRVL bike cannotat least not without fatter tires and a suspension fork, and you know how I feel about that:Of course the PRJCT GRVL bike is designed with garvel racing in mind. Is it a faster garvel racing bike than the Jones? I freely admit Im in no way qualified to answer, just as Im not qualified to say which one would be better for bikepacking. (Sure, Id assume it would be the Jones, but I havent slept in anything other than a bed in like 35 years.) Certainly the PRJCT GRVL bike is much lighter. Yes, you could also put together a Jones thats quite a bit lighter than the one Im riding, but it would be a fairly expensive proposition involving crabon bars and rims and a titanium frame, whereas the PRJCT GRVL bike is pretty light even in its current budget-friendly state. But is anything faster than being able to float over pretty much everything on a pair of 3-inch tires? I DONT KNOW. And I dont really care, either. All Ill say is that for an unloaded non-racing day rider like me the Jones is at least as good a gravel bike as the PRJCT GRVL bike. Yes, Id rather carry the PRJCT GRVL bike up a flight of stairs than the Jones, but I suspect the steel Jones would fare better than the PRJCT GRVL bike if I threw them both back down down it.As for whether or not any of this translates directly to Jesus carrying, Im not a bikepacker and Im not religious, so Im doubly underqualified to pass judgment there:On The Mountain Bike TrailTheres really no comparison here. You can certainly ride the PRJCT GRVL bike on a mountain bike trail, but the Jones wants to be on the mountain bike trail. While my intention was to ride the same route on both bikes, once I got to the forbidding Trails Behind The Mall on the Jones I could not resist going deeper into the woods, and turned into them without event thinking about it:Of all the cycling communities that have rejected meand pretty much all of them haveI dont think any have done so more emphatically than the mountain bikers:They have reminded me time and time again that I am not a real mountain biker, and I suppose theyre right, because by modern standards this is no longer mountain biking:By the way, this tire is almost seven years old, and it refuses to wear out:Clearly the sidewall is going to go long before the tread will:Anyway, I was all ready to declare the Jones the overall winner, but the next day I got back on the PRJCT GRVL bike as the snow began to fall and it couldnt have been better:Apples? Oranges? I guess I just like fruit salad.

All-road bikes blur boundaries and open doors. Fast on tarmac, confident on rough lanes and happy to sneak down a bridleway, here are the drop-bar do-it-alls that impressed us most last year

The prologue of the Tour Down Under proved to be profitable for UAE Team Emirates - XRG, who entered the race in position to win the overall classification after Jay Vine and Jhonatan Narvez put on a strong performance in Adelaide, and the former has put in time already on every single one of his r...

The 2026 Tour Down Under got under way today with a short, sharp prologue, with lots of time trial-specific setup tweaks on show. With an agreement in place that teams can't use TT bikes for this race, riders have been forced to make changes to their normal road bike setups for maximum speed on the 3.6km thrash. I was at the race start in Adelaide with access to the bikes. Here's what I was able to glean about the tech decisions the teams have made. Changes driven by necessity The 2026 Tour Down Under prologue revealed an array of setups some through necessity. Ashley Quinlan / Our Media The absence of time-trial specific bikes isnt as surprising as it might first seem it was a decision made by the race organisers and teams, in collaboration with the UCI, due to the unique location of the Australian race. Alongside a reduced carbon footprint, part of the reason stems from haulage costs. Should the teams have been obliged (on performance grounds) to bring their time trial bikes, one team insider suggested the total additional weight would have amounted to around 200-300kg which would result in thousands of pounds of extra air-freight fees. Ultimately, for a 3.6km time trial, this was deemed an avoidable cost. You could argue this improves technical competitiveness. With bigger-budget teams such as UAE Team Emirates-XRG, Visma-Lease a Bike and Ineos Grenadiers in a stronger financial position than smaller teams competing at the same level, it was suggested to BikeRadar that the poorer teams might have had to make hard decisions about whether to bring the equipment at all. All teams receive financial support to arrive at the race, according to our source, but this doesnt cover the entirety of the bill. Effectively, teams are required to fund the shortfall, and this means they bring enough specialist equipment for their key riders, while others make do with the standard equipment theyd usually race with. With that covered off, lets dive into the main changes the teams have made. Wheel swaps Road bikes were effectively 'converted' into time trial bikes. Ashley Quinlan / Our Media An open goal, given the prologue is officially designated a time trial, has been to fit deeper front wheels than the road-race mandated 65mm, and disc rear wheels. Some Groupama-FDJ United riders had use of the Miche Kleos RD SPX3 tri-spoke front wheel, while Jayco-AlUla riders used a Cadex Aero 4-Spoke Tubeless Disc Brake wheelset. All other teams stuck with wheels with a regular laced-spoke design. Not all the riders are using the fastest wheelsets available, though, a decision driven mainly by the additional costs associated with shipping over the extra equipment for riders who wont be targeting a strong individual performance in the prologue. 1x dominates Single chainrings were commonplace, but not exclusive. Ashley Quinlan / Our Media Team mechanics have been hard at work switching over the bikes of the main contenders for the prologue, and overall victory, to a single-chainring setup up front. The benefits of 1x drivetrains include improved aerodynamic performance, plus a small weight saving when the front derailleur and second (inner) chainring are removed. Theres also less chance of slipping a chain or accidentally calling for a shift should fingers stray over the front derailleur shifter, which remains fitted to all the bikes. The largest chainring I spotted? 60 teeth. Mixed tyre choices Some riders had a mix of tyres on their bikes Ashley Quinlan / Our Media Teams were running a mix of tyres for the race. Alpecin-Premier Tech, for example, chose to run odd tyres for the prologue (a Pirelli P Zero Race TT mounted to the Shimano rear disc wheel, and a P Zero Race TLR RS to the front wheel), for practical reasons. Given the prologue finished late in the evening, and the bikes needed to be ready for the journey to the start of stage 1 by 8am the following day, it was deemed too much of a drain on resource to make wholesale changes to the tyre setup in between (bearing in mind the limit of kit each team has brought with it). sometimes due to a lack of options. Ashley Quinlan / Our Media There were also variations in size defending Tour Down Under champion Jhonatan Narvez, of UAE Team Emirates, was running 25mm Continental Grand Prix 5000 TT TR tyres on his combination of ENVE SES 6.7 front wheel and ENVE SES Disc rear wheel. Meanwhile, Enzo Paleni of Groupama-FDJ United was running a 25mm Grand Prix 5000 TT TR on his Miche rear disc wheel, and a 28mm Grand Prix 5000 S TR on his Miche Kleos RD SPX3 front wheel. Team mechanics revealed the choice of a 25mm rear tyre was down to concerns over passing the UCIs credit card width rule governing tyre-frame spacing when running a 28mm tyre. Off-sponsor selections These Zipp wheels were sourced from old stock at Lotto-Intermarch the brand sponsored the team (as it was then) a couple of years previously. Ashley Quinlan / Our Media Some teams were running non-sponsor-correct components. At Lotto-Intermarch, some riders were using a Zipp Super 9 Disc wheel (a common sight among SRAM-sponsored teams), given wheel sponsor Oquo has yet to release one. But the most common non-sponsor choice was single chainrings. Single chainrings were the single most common non-sponsor correct component. Ashley Quinlan / Our Media UAE Team Emirates-XRG had taped over the CarbonTi branding on its 1x chainrings (it has used these without covering them up previously), while Alpecin-Premier Tech and Ineos Grenadiers were using unbranded Miche RD R92 chainrings. Jayco-AlUla was another team to opt for third-party chainrings, fitting an SR-TMP DM from Dutch chainring specialist The Mechanic Parts. Rider-position tweaks Rider positions also changed to improve speed for the short prologue. Most riders opted to run an identical position to their normal race setup again, some team mechanics confirmed this was partly because of the desire to reduce setup time between the short prologue and the following mornings stage one. However, some riders, including XDS-Astanas Marco Schrettl, made small tweaks to their saddle position for the race, pushing it as far forward as the rails allowed in order to pitch him further forward over the bottom bracket. This more closely imitates a riders time trial position on a TT bike, and opens the hip angle for improved power transfer. Read more Scott, Ridley and Orbea are back, but still no Factor 2026 men's WorldTour bikes and trends analysed Three Tarmacs, three Aeroads and no Campagnolo | 2026 Womens WorldTour bikes and equipment How to watch the Tour Down Under 2026 | Global options for live TV, streaming and highlights

Paul Bush has been trying for two decades to organise a Grand Dpart. Now hes scored two at once

The Tour Down Under is not just decided by legs and tactics. Every day, a quieter story runs alongside the racing: the jury decisions that shape behaviour in the bunch, on the roadside and inside team cars. This article tracks every fine, warning and sanction handed out during the 2026 Tour Down Und...

Our third and final roundup of Good Night 2025 campouts spotlights a medley of reader getaways in Japan, Scotland, New Zealand, Germany, Canada, Belgium, and various corners of the United States. Find reflections from 10 readers who closed out 2025 with a bikepacking overnighter here...The post Good Night 2025 Roundup: Community Campouts (Part 2) appeared first on BIKEPACKING.com.