This is actually the second release of the Nimbl Urano shoes. Previously released in the winter of 2024, after testing and feedback from professionals, Nimbl shelved the shoe so that they could fix some issues. Now, it's back with the Italian brand hoping that the Urano will set the standard for high end gravel race shoes. Unboxing the Nimbl Urano shoes is something of an experience Future - Andy TurnerShoe bag, and picture from the teamFuture - Andy TurnerThe shoes also include a bagFuture - Andy TurnerInside are the shoes themselves Future - Andy TurnerConstructionThe Urano are built upon the same monocoque carbon fibre sole as the rest of the Nimbl line of shoes. This results in the same incredibly low stack height of around 2mm, with the rear of the sole extending up to create a stiffer heel cup. The main differences are the two-bolt cleat mounting for Shimano SPD cleats, and the inclusion of rubber treads. A TPU toe guard, front and rear treads, and mid-sole protective piece have been added for off-road walking traction and sole protection, a feature you see on many of the best gravel shoes.As with other Nimbl shoes, retention comes via the two Boa Li2 dials. These allow for micro adjustments for tightening and loosening, with a pull to release system. These are the plastic topped version rather than the metal ones on the Ultimate and Ultimate Glide shoes. A grippy exterior is still included on the dials, in rubber this time, to allow for easy grip and retention adjustments. On the upper, the structure is the same as the Ultimate shoes, with a conventional tongue design. However, the microfibre upper has been redesigned to be more resilient, and easier to clean given the off-road design of these shoes. For ventilation there are multiple perforations across the sides of the upper material. A size 43 is quoted as being 254g per shoe, the size 45 on test was 248g per shoe including all the parts and insoles. Sizes range from 39 to 47, with half sizes from 41 up to 47. Black and white colour options are available. The shoes are a slightly off-white compared to the other white Nimbl shoes (Image credit: Future - Andy Turner)The RideIn terms of performance, I have been mightily impressed by the Nimbl Urano shoes. Using them on the road with Shimano SPD pedals, the power transfer and light weight has meant the setup feels.as good as the usual Speedplay setup I use for road riding. Power transfer for sprints and higher capacity efforts feels planted and direct, while the low weight does feel better at higher cadences when the shoe is moving faster.To really test these shoes, I used them for the Gralloch UCI gravel race. They clearly didnt slow me down, after 3.5 hours of racing I had averaged 291 watts and set plenty of power PBs. In essence, they felt like road racing shoes, providing impressive stiffness as a platform to launch watts from.Comfort wise, these have taken less breaking in time than the Ultimate Air or Glide shoes Ive tested. The upper is stiff, but not unforgiving and the low entry to the shoes means there is very little chance of any upper material rubbing on ankles. This low entry also does not result in any lack of retention around the heel. The rear of the shoe cups the heel nicely with a fit that is narrow enough on my heel and ankle, but not constricting.The Urano use a tongue design like the Ultimate, but not the Ultimate GlideFuture - Andy TurnerTwo Boa Li2 dials provide retentionFuture - Andy TurnerThe underside features tread but also a lot of exposed carbonFuture - Andy TurnerThe insoles are rather basic compared to the shoeFuture - Andy TurnerOf course the Boa Li2 dials play a big part in the retention. I personally prefer the tongue-less design of the Ultimate Glide and I find that dial setup does lead to better pressure distribution when really clamping down the dials. However, on the Urano, the two dial setup with tongue can still be tightened down enough to secure the foot well for most high capacity efforts without being overly tight on any section of the foot. The Boa Li2 dials have been praised enough in many shoe reviews I have done, as well as by others, and remain the standard bearer for retention dials on cycling shoes with both the micro-adjustments for tightening and loosening, as well as the pull to release for easy foot release. After 3.5 hours of racing, the outside of my right foot was aching, due in part to the stiff carbon sole. I have a high arch, so even with arch support I can get a pressure buildup on the outside of my foot, but after this amount of time on rough terrain, there was certainly some aching. The main difference between the Urano and the rest of the Nimbl lineup is of course the gravel element of them. The sole uses two two bolt attachment points for Shimano SPD cleats rather than the three or four bolt road options. The upper is also more rugged and easier to clean, with dirt wiping easily off them after a day of racing. On the sole of the shoe there are also more rugged tread elements for walking off-road and maintaining some grip. These are effective, and have proven useful riding on bridleways and requiring a fair bit of walking in some cases, but these are race shoes and these are not as grippy as more adventure focussed gravel shoes. You can see the toe guard has come away slightly from the shoeFuture - Andy TurnerMeanwhile on the other shoe this has not happenedFuture - Andy TurnerThere is one glaring issue with these shoes though, and that is the quality of the finish. On the front tread section especially, a good amount of it is visibly glued on, and can be lifted quite easily by hand. Its not the quality I would expect for a pair of shoes that cost more than half a grand. I have seen far better quality of the tread fitting on shoes that are a third of the price. They appear secure enough, with sections that fit into the sole itself on some small openings, but its still a little bit tardy in terms of finish quality.The insoles are the same basic ones that come with all Nimbl shoes, and I am in two minds when it comes to criticism of these. On the one hand, if you spend 550 on cycling shoes, you are likely performance focussed and use custom orthotics. If you dont, you should, its a far greater performance gain. On the other hand, the insoles that come with the QUOC M3 shoes with adjustable arch are fantastic and I use them instead of the custom insoles I have, as with the high arch support they work well for me. Regardless, with the Nimbl Urano you will likely need to buy insoles, or use whatever pair you already use, as the supplied ones dont offer much support for anyone with any form of arch in their foot.ValueAs with previous Nimbl shoe reviews, value is an area where the price tag does just mean they struggle comparatively. 550 / $649 is a huge amount to pay for cycling shoes, regardless of how good they are. The simple fact is at this price there is certainly a case of diminishing returns on investment. I have previously been racing in a pair of Specialized S-Works Recon Lace shoes, which retailed for 300 / $325. They are lightweight, fit well, and offer a great level of power transfer, for nearly half the price. Spending my own money, I could not justify spending 250 more on a pair of shoes for what is a small increase in performance based on statistics.Even the new S-Works Recon Evo, based on the Ares 2 shoe, are 399 /$549, and feature a broader spectrum of sizes. On the face of it some of the finish of those is slightly better than the Urano as well. However, the more convoluted path of the Boa dial lace is ripe for damage from mud and grit ingress over time. The new Sidi Aeron is another consideration, again 399 / $570 and carbon soled, dual-dialled, and with good levels of tread. The carbon sole is also less exposed for longevity, but this will add weight even if that figure is not disclosed. But then this is a high-performance race shoe. Compared to most dual-boa-dial equipped shoes the Urano are around half the weight. Thats often around 500g saving which at a higher performance level is not insignificant. The power transfer is also exceptional, so much so that I can happily use these shoes for fast paced road rides on SPD pedals. For those seeking every advantage, there may be value to them in these shoes. For most of us, Id say you are far better buying in the 250-300 price point for performance gravel shoes. They will be mostly as good, likely feature greater longevity features, and cost far less. How easy to clean are the shoes?Future - Andy TurnerLeft - unclean. Right - the damp cloth experience Future - Andy TurnerConclusionThe Nimbl Urano shoes are quintessentially Nimbl. They are extortionately expensive, exceptionally lightweight, wonderfully stiff, secure and comfortable, and lust worthy in their style and desirability. If you want the fastest gravel racing shoe option for SPD cleats, youll likely struggle to do better than these. If you want almost all of that performance but for significantly less cash and potentially greater longevity, look elsewhere.

With Tadej Pogacar the overwhelming favourite for the 2026 Tour de France, some cycling commentators have suggested that an allied approach among the chasers could be enough to de-throne the four-time champion. Although Jonas Vingegaard is fancied by some to have Pogacar's number at times during the...

Tadej Pogaar aims for a record-equalling fifth win, Jonas Vingegaard and Remco Evenepoel line up with green lights for their form and health, Florian Lipowitz is back after the podium finish last year while Isaac del Toro and Paul Seixas bring carefree promise to the race too.The RouteThis is a back-loaded Tour. All grand tours aim to build to a crescendo but this year the Pyrenees are tackled early and well wait for the third weekend with Stages 14, 15 and after the rest the Stage 16 time trial to shape the overall before a fierce pair of stages finishing on Alpe dHuez on Stages 19 and 20. There are 10-6-4 second time bonuses at the stage finish.A reminder that all stages, the rules and more are one page at inrng.com/tourTadej Pogaar (UAE) is the prime pick. He bids to become the fifth rider to win the Tour five times and theres not the wisp of a cloud on the horizon of his ambitions. He seems unbeatable he hasnt lost a stage race since the 2023 Tour and crucially his rivals often believe it, settling for second as their best available result. He can win from many situations, from reduced group sprints to time trials to summit finishes, and if hes thirty seconds down on Vingegaard after Stage 20, he could even reverse this on the cobbles of Montmartre. The form is there as his recent Tour de Suisse stage showed. Any weak points? Fetch a microscope. With hindsight he might have been beatable last year given he later revealed a knee injury. This time his team are not the best for the opening team time trial and hes prone to bold attacks than often pay off but may not always Amstel Gold Race in 2025 and seems to need stimulation from rivals to be at his best. With luck he and well be boosted by what his rivals are offering this time.Isaac del Toro just won the Aura Tour and comfortably so. He showed in the Giro last year he can last three weeks and has reconned the key stages of the Tour with Pogaar, the apprentice alongside the master. Pogaar has gifted wins to team mates before but think a stage rather than a fifth Tour de France and the Mexicans relative weakness seems to be time trials but the Evian-Thonon stage this year has a sustained climb which suits. Theres a strong chance hes on the podium in Paris.Jonas Vingegaard (Visma-LAB) comes to the Tour after winning the Giro, and taking Paris-Nice and the Volta Catalunya, and before all that the Vuelta too. Above all this means a clear run with all his injuries a distant memory. He rode the Giro partly because he got trounced at the Tour last year. This is his paradox, consistently better than all the rest, except for Pogaar where the magnifying effect of the Tour de France makes him look like perpetual runner-up but last year he had his moments, he even put Pogaar under pressure in the third week. Its unlikely the Giro triumph liberates him as we did not discover a new side to his racing, rather the economy of his victory means hes not fatigued. He even says hes better than ever, but a year ago at the Dauphin he said his power numbers were better than ever, only he was beaten by Pogaar. Hes got a whole team in support, theyll miss Wout van Aert who is capable of getting Vingegaard out of tricky situations. As things stand he looks a likely runner-up again but with the hope he can push Pogaar hard in the third week and see what happens.Remco Evenepoel (Red Bull-Bora-Hansgrohe) starts a crunch Tour for him. Hired on big money as Tour contender, hes had a clear run to the race, including skipping racing since April. But is he really a Tour contender? Hell need a quantum change to out-climb Tadej Pogaar and Jonas Vingegaard, and now younger riders are queuing to overtake him too. But he is looking razor lean and has been preparing for just this. Some of his best wins have come about from surprise attacks, taking a gap and then being almost impossible to reel in and if he could deploy rather than hoping to win a summit finish shoot-out then he could cause an upset but there are few mountain stages valley roads to suit, this could land him a stage win more than the yellow jersey. If youre or he is superstitious the Tourmalet his nemesis in the 2023 Vuelta and the 2025 Tour comes early and should be an easier hurdle to clear.Florian Lipowitz was third last year, albeit eleven minutes down but the best of the rest behind Pogaar and Vingegaard thanks to consistency. He seems to trundle around like an impervious armoured vehicle but also the proverbial diesel who follows but rarely shapes the race. Hes still searching for his first World Tour level win. The 25 year olds racecraft is still a work-in-progress, he dropped the field going uphill in the recent Tour of Slovenia but was hesitant on the ensuing descent. Itll be intriguing to see how he and Evenepoel fare together, the sense is that Evenepoel is boosted by this internal competition but maybe prove brittle if overtaken.Paul Seixas (Decathlon-CMA CGM) is the youngest rider to start the Tour de France since 1937. The 19 year old had an excellent spring campaign that saw him second in the Strade Bianche, dominate the Tour of the Basque Country and win the Flche Wallonne before being the only rider willing or able to match Pogaar in Lige-Bastogne-Lige. On the teams whiteboard the first goal is to finish the race, the second is get the best GC result possible. Its this challenge that is open, a field of dreams for him and fans. Hes shown glimpses that suggest hes going to be a contender someday soon. His teenage erreur de jeunesse on a descent in the Aura Tour last month cost him plenty, from a shot at victory to skin on his palms that required daily bandages and missed training. But this has dampened hype around the ace. Back in April he was still discovering how he fared when going all in for a one week stage race so a grand tour is going to be an adventure. One of his talents seems to be able to go very deep to win or follow rivals but this could cost him, whether the following day or week later.Juan Ayuso (Lidl-Trek) as a Tour winner? Surely not this time and the goal is more like Seixas: to finish and do the best on GC possible but his team are spending big these days and need results at the Tour including some proof that Ayuso is a potential podium contender. Results could come on the opening day, it could be via Mads Pedersen mid-race but Ayuso is the spear tip. Mattias Skjelmose is an extra option for the team but seems a step below.Tom Pidcock (Pinarello-Q36.5) feels like a human scratchcard, you never know what you are going to get each time. Capable of toying with Pogaar on the right course, and finishing on the podium in the Vuelta last summer, hes having a great season in terms of results and seems to be enjoying it with the Tour as the goal all along. But GC or stage wins? Presumably hell aim for the former and pivot to the latter if hes outside the top-5 once a hierarchy is established but from breakaways he could haul himself higher up GC again.Richard Carapaz (EF Education-Easypost) is capable of a top-10 finish on GC but he and his team know that this is not a valuable or visible result beyond the UCI points they need, instead a stage win or the mountains competition is more suitable.Cian Uijtdebroeks (Movistar) has changed teams several times but hes only 23 as he makes his Tour debut and like others will aim to see how far he can go on GC. The terror of the pressroom for those tasked with spelling his name correctly first time, he finished a steady seventh in the recent Aura Tour saying hed work on sharpening his climbing. His team have plenty of stage hunters so the pressure isnt all on him.Antonio Tiberi (Bahrain) is flying below the radar, second in the UAE Tour this year showed he could climb well but hes been discreet since, including the recent Tour de Suisse but the Tour has been the goal all along although hell find team mates busy aiming for other things. Ben OConnor (Jayco) tried to go for GC last time but it didnt work, then ended up winning the Queen Stage and finished 11th for some UCI points, the team would probably sign for the same again. Tobias Halland Johannessen (Uno-X) was sixth last year and has consistently been in the top-10 in stage races this year and while the field is deeper can hope to do the same again while other team mates try to pick off a stage win again. Netcompany-Ineos dont have an obvious GC contender so a top-10 might be possible for Egan Bernal, Kvin Vauquelin or Thymen Arensman but would they settle for 8th or prefer 12th and a stage win? The talk is of the latter, getting more noticeable results rather than the habitual GC quest.PogaarVingegaardDel ToroSeixas, Evenepoel, LipowitzThe post Tour de France Preview first appeared on The Inner Ring.

We ask a lot of the best radar bike lights: to accurately warn of approaching traffic, to provide audio and visual prompts, and even to include cameras to capture any erroneous activity. That is all before we even consider how they perform as a bike light. Unfortunately, due to this complexity, some just aren't up to the job, turning a genuinely useful safety device into an expensive and dangerous gimmick. In my testing of the best rearview radars, I am looking for products that dont report false positives warnings of vehicles when there are none or false negatives a failure to warn of approaching vehicles. Ill also assess detection range, detection angle, and accuracy at lower speeds, as well as how they interact with the best bike computers and against the enormous range of best bike lights. To test the effectiveness of the best rearview radars, I rode a predefined 13km circuit that included a variety of traffic conditions and reflections from buildings and structures that could confuse a bike radar. I also set up a static rig on a long, straight stretch of road, which enabled me to accurately test range and confidently log false positives and negatives.The winner of this test might not come as a suprise. While it was close, the founding brand of this category recently stepped it up with a new model, and that new model is, without a doubt, the new market leader. The Garmin Varia RearVue 820 might be expensive, but its accuracy is unmatched. Best Radar Bike Lights 2026: Best overall radar bike light(Image credit: Simon Fellows)1. Garmin Varia RearVue 820 High-resolution and accurate radar brings superlative levels of clarityLumens (Max): 100 | No. of light modes: 5 including customisation via Varia Mobile App | Mounting: Rubber strap & Garmin quarter turn mount | Battery life: 10 - 30 hrs | Radar field of view: 60 | Vehicle detection range: 175m/190yds | Weight: 90g/3.2ozHigh-resolution radar brings superlative levels of accuracyIts ability to track same speed vehicles in unmatchedLight output and battery life improved vs the outgoing RTL515USB-C and a removable rechargeable batteryExpensive, its enhanced featureset is questionable in parts, but its accuracy wins outMany of its high-end features are exclusive to modern Garmin head unitsThe Garmin Varia RearVue 820 has quite the reputation to live up to its predecessor, the Garmin Varia RTL515, was widely regarded as the gold standard and one of our own best bike lights. The change from Micro-USB has seemingly taken Garmin aeons to implement; however, this has allowed the brand not just to update the plug but to redevelop the product and take a step ahead of the competition. The flagship Varia now delivers up to 100 lumens in day flash, and battery life is nothing short of phenomenal I managed an impressive 11 hours 15 minutes in solid mode with radar. The seismic change is the switch from low-resolution 24 GHz radar to significantly more precise 60 GHz waves. In practice, this means its more responsive, more accurate, and better at tracking traffic at the same speed.In the field, the difference is night and day; from an increased range regularly surpassing 160 metres during my static test, even for smaller cars to the RearVue 820s ability to better pick out individual vehicles in a group. Same-speed vehicles are tracked with greater persistence, no longer dropping out at slow-moving roundabouts or at the approach to road junctions. Less convincing is the classification of vehicles by size. Knowing whether youre being followed by a bus, a car, or a motorbike is a seductive idea, but in practice, it's not yet reliable.Nevertheless, the newfound clarity elevates the RearVue 820 to best-in-class status, something Im willing to pay a premium for.Rear my full review of the Garmin Varia RearVue 820 Best Garmin alternative(Image credit: Simon Fellows)2. Wahoo Trackr Radar Flawless radar performance over thousands of miles of testingLumens (Max): 53 | No. of light modes: 4 | Mounting: Rubber strap with a quarter turn mount | Battery life: Over 10 hours | Radar field of view: 35 | Vehicle detection range: 150m/164yds | Weight: 99g/3.5ozSuperb radar range under optimal conditionsGreat connectivity with Wahoo computers, plus other brands too.Dual LEDs are super visible, night or dayUnique additional features, such as the brake lightGood battery lifeIt has a narrower field of view than Garmin unitsSlightly more expensive than the competitionSince switching to a Wahoo Trackr Radar last June for the majority of my riding, after four happy years with Garmin radar products, I havent been disappointed. In a market awash with unimaginative blocks of plastic, the Trackr has clearly seen the sharp end of a designers pencil. Sleek and softly rounded, its easily the best-looking radar, as well as being functional. Its easy to attach to either round or aero seat posts and holds with limpet-like tenacity. Setup is straightforward via Wahoos generic smartphone app, and head unit control is slick I have used the Trackr Radar with both with serveral of the best bike computers, and the near-indistinguishable user experience has been positive. Out on the road, radar functionality is flawless, with no history of false positives or negatives. With the only blip coming in my static tests, where small vehicles were not detected until around 75 to 95 metres. On the flipside, the Trackr is good at isolating vehicles within a group. Speed-matched vehicles would inevitably disappear but quickly reappear when traffic moves again.One of the few units here with well-spaced twin LEDs, a useful feature that lets the top LED operate a different pattern from the lower. There are only four lighting modes but they cover most bases. Output is relatively low at 53 Lumens, but that provides up to 800m of daylight visibility.It's hard not to like the Trackr; it is one of the best units I have tested. Given how cheap it is compared to the Varia RearVue, you might overlook its slightly narrow field of view. Rear my full review of the Wahoo Trackr RadarBest standalone radar light(Image credit: Simon Fellows)3. Lezyne Radar Drive 300 Easily the most versatile and simplest to use radar hereLumens (Max): 300 | No. of light modes: 8 | Mounting: Fixed rubber strap | Battery life: 4.5 to 16 hours | Radar field of view: 35 | Vehicle detection range: 150m/164yds | Weight: 144g/5ozExceptional detection accuracy with zero false positivesVersatile 'Radar React' system allows for a head-unit-free setupMassive 300-lumen Day Flash is class-leading for conspicuityExcellent instructions and video supportUSB-C charging and robust build qualityMount lacks a quick-release quarter-turn35 field of view is narrower than the Garmin VariaChunky, compared to some of its svelte competitorsThe feature-rich Lezyne Radar Drive 300 is among the most versatile I tested. While many require a bike computer to display traffic threats, the Lezyne offers a couple of alternatives. Firstly, a free app or it can be purchased with a 1,200-lumen front LED light Lezynes Radar React System displays traffic alerts on a rear-facing illuminated panel. Even when nothing is connected, the Lezyne will still warn passing traffic by utilising its light function to increase intensity. So, if you have no need for a bike computer, theres no need to buy one. However, if you already own one, the Radar Drive 300 offers seamless integration with most leading brands. Lezyne's detection algorithm is excellent, throwing no false positives or negatives during my tests, and the maximum detection range of 150m was routinely exceeded by larger vehicles. Its ability to detect Speed-matched vehicles was in line with those lights with a tighter 35 field of view. The tail light outputs a whopping 300 lumens in Day Flash mode, which is exceedingly bright for a rear light. Its brutish aesthetic screams see and be seen, but its slightly let down by a cumbersome mounting arrangement that forgoes any quick-release or quarter-turn mount solution in favour of a basic rubber strap design.The Radar Drive 300 represents serious competition for Wahoo and Garmin.Rear my full review of the Lezyne Radar Drive 300Best budget radar light(Image credit: Simon Fellows)4. iGPSport SR Mini Proving that bike radar lights do not have to be expensiveLumens (Max): 30 | No. of light modes: 7 including customisation via App | Mounting: Rubber strap with a quarter turn mount | Battery life: 6 - 20 hours | Radar field of view: 45 | Vehicle detection range: 160m/175yds | Weight: 50gSolid value for moneyGenuinely tiny and lightweightImpressive detection range, often outperforming pricier rivalsEye-catching animated light modesOccasional false positive detectionsThe included saddle rail mount is awfulLED array lacks the long-range punch of a single-focused lensThe IGPSport SR Mini breaks the mould, not just in size - being considerably more compact than others - but also in its hoop of 12 LEDs around its outer edge, over the conventional single-centred design used by Garmin and Wahoo.The SR Mini performed brilliantly in my static range test, consistently picking out small cars at distances of 100 metres or more. This is about a 20-metre improvement over many other units in this test, giving me an extra second of warning. More often than not, it also managed to identify individual cars within tight groups, provided they werent completely blocked by a larger vehicle.Riding out with the SR Mini on my test circuit, I noticed no false negatives, but at least two false positives. The first was a reflection off a stone wall from an oncoming vehicle, and the second was a ghost vehicle that briefly appeared about 50 meters behind me. While not critical, false positives are distracting enough that I'm economical with the SR Minis rating.The iGPSports companion app is a bonus if you dont own a bike computer, and the mounting interface is quarter-turn, but for some reason, iGPSports only supplies a saddle rail mount. Would it be too much trouble to include a simple seatpost mount?Rear my full review of the iGPSports SR MiniAlso tested...As part of this test, I also tested two other lights: the Magene L508 and the Magicshine SeeMee R300. While they function perfectly well as lights, with both having feature-rich specifications that offer decent value, neither performed particularly well as radar units, regularly throwing false positives and negatives. Thats not to say that you shouldn't buy them at all, by any means; I'd certainly consider others above first, particularly the IGPSport if you're on a budget. Magene L508 The Magene L508 performed well as a light and, in terms of range, detected smaller cars at 80 to 125 metres and larger vans and pickup trucks at up to 140 metres. However, it faltered more than most at picking out individual vehicles from tight groups, particularly when out riding, even when cars were well spaced. The bargain-priced L508 has much more potential than the Magichshine and could compete with the IGPSport if Magene improves its accuracy through firmware updates.Magicshine SeeMee R300 If I were awarding prizes for packaging, the Magicshine SeeMee R300 would top the podium. Its a highly visible solution, day or night, thanks to its 270 coverage and 300 lumen output. Unfortunately, out on the road, this well-priced radar began to unravel. It was plagued with false positives, and in two particular scenarios in my static test, it was triggered by a vehicle travelling away from me on my circuit; it failed to alert me to a car as I exited a local village, which is a complete no-no.How I tested the best radar lightsAs part of this year's testing, I assessed well over a dozen radar and smart bike lights for use year-round. Specifically, in my testing of the best radar bike lights, I broke down my data acquisition into two smaller tests. I wanted to provide both a scientific and real-world data log. For the first test, I set up a static rig along a long, straight section of road. This, first and foremost, allowed me to understand how each light worked, but to accurately test the range and log false positives and negatives with confidence. This was simply measuring out a long 200m section of road and placing my bike in a stand with both a Wahoo and a Garmin Bike computer to hand. I then verified this data in real-world scenarios by riding a predefined 13km circuit multiple times for each light, across a variety of traffic conditions and at different times of day.Not to mention, I also tested all of these lights for their general function and features. This included battery capacity, recharge times, mounts, and compatibility with the best bike computers, in which I used both the Garmin Edge 1050 and the Wahoo Elemnt Roam 3.Meet the expertRadar lights testing resultsVehicle detection range (claimed)Vehicle detection range (tested - small vehicles)False positives detectedFalse negatives detectedGarmin Varia RearVue 820175m/190ydsOver 150m/164ydsNoNoWahoo Trackr Radar150m/164yds75m/82ydsNoNoLezyne Radar Drive 300150m/164ydsOver 100m/109ydsNoNoiGPSport SR Mini160m/175ydsOver 100m/109ydsYesNoMagene L508140m/153yds80m/88ydsYesYesMagicshine SeeMee R300140m/153yds85m/92ydsYesYesHow to choose a rearview radarIt's worth noting that radar lights are an additional feature on what is already a complex product: rear bike lights. So, your first port of call when considering which one might be best for you should be to consider what you need from a rear light first, before delving too deeply into radars.Here is a quick recap on how to choose a rear light, which should help narrow things down: Output and Lumens - How bright the light is always plays a big part in your visibility, but there is a trade-off with battery life, and how that light is projected.Beam pattern or visibility angle - The output of your light is next to useless if it's not visible from a wide range of angles. Where you mount your light can significantly impact this.Orientation and mounting - this can be determined by how the manufacturer arranges the battery cells and where they place the LEDs; it could also be affected by the shape, height, and what sits behind your seatpost, like racks.Runtime - the light's orientation and size play a big role in how many cells it has, ultimately determining how long it will last.So, how do you choose a rearview radar light? Previously, this was largely driven by compatibility with the best bike computers. If you were running a Garmin unit, you would likely look to the Varia and so on. With more brands coming to the market, there is now a much more urgent need for computer brands to open up either platforms to others. Worth noting that, in the same way, it is opening up the computer market as well, with brands like Magene and IGPSport keen not just to sell you their lights.In a way, this is good news for consumers, as it places less emphasis on brand compatibility and more on the units' features, such as detection range and the radar's viewing angle. Ultimately, it puts the emphasis on where you ride.(Image credit: Simon Fellows)If, like me, you live in a rural area with lots of twisty, tight lanes, you may well want to consider models with greater detection ranges and those that can do this at very wide angles, like the Garmin Varia RearVue 820, so you can nip into a pull-in or layby. For those who hit the main roads into the city or town, while detection range will certainly be a consideration, you will likely want the unit to be better at picking out vehicle groups and their sizes, as well as the speed at which they are approaching. This is where units like the Wahoo Trackr Radar thrive. Frequently asked questions about Radar bike lightsHow does a rearview radar work?The large majority of rearview radars use a similar technology to detect what is behind you, the speed at which it is travelling, and how many vehicles there are by utilising radio waves. Very simply, the unit sends out a signal and collects data on any of these signals that have 'bounced off' vehicles. It is then up to your computer, the app, and the software to process this data into visual or audible prompts. What is a false negative?A false negative is just a fancy way of saying the unit failed to spot a vehicle approaching you, which, in my opinion, is an obsolete failure when it comes to the best rearview radars. Even if it spots the vehicle late or loses it, this is forgivable depending on the road furniture and parcours; at the very least, it has made you aware of something there. What is a false positive?False positives or ghost readings, however you would like to call them, are just as frustrating and distracting but more forgivable than false negatives. The algorithms within the software have a lot to process when it comes to working out what is a reflection, a vehicle, road furniture, etc. Luckily, none of the units I tested suffered too badly with this issue; however, at least when it isn't sure, the unit will show it as something being there. This shows the units are only as good as the software that supports them, but at least brands can update with firmware. Something that luckily I haven't seen any of is a false positive being prioritised over a genuinely positive match with a moving vehicle.

Isaac del Toro is on the verge of realising one of the great dreams of his career. The Mexican will make his debut this Saturday at the 2026 Tour de France wearing the national champions jersey and lining up with the powerhouse UAE Team Emirates XRG. At the pre-race press conference attended by Cyc...

The 2026 Tour de France starts in Barcelona on Saturday 4 July and covers 3,333km (2,071 miles), with a total of 54,450 metres of elevation gain, before it arrives in Paris just over three weeks later. At 205km, Stage 13 from Dole to Belfort is the longest, while the Stage 1 team time trial covers only 19km. The average stage length is 158.7km, or 98.6 miles. 21 stages The 2026 Tour de France travels from Barcelona to Paris and covers 3,333km before arriving in Paris after 21 stages and more than 55km of elevation gain. The modern Tour de France consists of 21 stages, typically with two rest days one on the second and one on the third Monday after the start or, in French, the Grand Dpart. Tours usually start on the first Saturday in July and always finish on a Sunday. If the race begins outside mainland France, the start may be on a Friday rather than a Saturday, to allow an additional day for a transfer after the first three days of racing. The distance covered by the 2026 Tour de France is fairly typical of recent editions. Last years race was planned to cover only 6km more than the 2026 Tour, although with 2,000 metres less climbing. Tadej Pogaar won the 2025 race with a total race time of 76 hours and 32 seconds, at an average speed of 42.85km/h. The time of Simone Consonni, the 160th and slowest rider to finish the race, was 81 hours, 52 minutes and 12 seconds more than five hours behind Pogaar. No fewer than 24 riders abandoned the Tour before it reached Paris. The first Tour de France and the longest Stages in the first Tour de France averaged 404km and were ridden on bikes weighing around 16kg, with a single gear. Art Media/Print Collector/Getty Images Race lengths have varied since the first Tour de France in 1903, which covered 2,428km. However, that Tour and its successor consisted of only six stages, so in 1903 stages averaged over 404km. By 1906, the race had stretched to 4,545km over 13 stages still an average of almost 350km per stage. At 5,745km, the 1926 race was the longest and consisted of 17 stages, averaging 338km in length. Early Tours would finish one stage and start the next in the same location, while modern Tours often include transfers between start and end towns, so the race can now cover more areas of France with shorter total distances. It can even start in another country without a land border with France, such as the 2027 Tour de France Grand Dpart from the UK.

Fans in the UK wanting to watch the Tour de France live for free have a lifeline in Welsh-language channel S4C.Also available on BBC iPlayer, S4C will show live coverage of stages 1, 2, 3, 18, 19, 20 and 21. This means fans will be able to watch the key Grand Dpart stages in Catalonia, and the denoument on Alpe d'Huez and in Paris, although coverage will obviously be in Welsh.This season will be the first season in decades that the Tour will not be shown live, in full, on television for free in the UK. In 2025, it was revealed that ITV would no longer televise the Tour, the exclusive UK rights having been sold to Warner Bros Discovery (WBD), the parent company of TNT Sports.Live English coverage in the UK will remain on TNT Sports and HBO Max, with contracts costing 30.99 a month, although it can be purchased for 25.99 a month on a 12-month contract.However, free-to-air highlights will be shown on 5 for the first time this summer. The terrestrial channel, formerly Channel 5, has signed a deal until 2028 to show daily coverage of Tour, as well as highlights of the Giro d'Italia and Vuelta a Espaa, presented by Rebecca Charlton. The station will also show live coverage of the UK Grands Dparts of the Tour de France and Tour de France Femmes avec Zwift in 2027. Highlights will be on 5 at 7pm every evening, starting Saturday 4 July in Barcelona. Daily highlights of the 2027 Tour de France Femmes will also be available on 5.S4C is also in negotiations to cover the Tour de France in 2027 when it begins in the UK and passes through Wales for the first time in its history.This year, the presenting team includes Rhodri Gomer, Peredur ap Gwynedd, also known as a guitarist for Pendulum, Gruff Lewis and Manon Lloyd.Ap Gwynedd said: "I am very happy that S4C is broadcasting the Tour de France once again, for the 13th year in a row. It's pretty bonkers that we've broadcast the race since 2014. And of course, with a stage of the Tour taking place in Wales next year, the word 'exciting' doesn't even come close to how I feel about the future!"Stages 1, 2, 3, 19, 20 and 21 will be shown on S4C, S4C Clic, BBC iPlayer and S4C Chwaraeons YouTube channel, while stage 18 will be on just S4C Clic, BBC iPlayer.Read our full guide on how to watch the 2026 Tour de France here.

This weeks DealClincher features pro-level discounts on Tour de France tech, with tyres, shoes, helmets, sunglasses, groupsets, nutrition and more all included