Van Rysel RCR-F review: Standing on a giant's shoulders

The RCR-F is Van Rysel’s aero-focused road race bike, and unlike most products sold at Decathlon, Van Rysel's giant parent company of big-box sporting goods stores, this one comes with ambitions aimed squarely at the WorldTour, not the weekend warrior. The RCR-F has been used by Decathlon-CMA CGM since the Tour de France in 2024, the result of a direct collaboration with the team riders and aero experts Swiss Side to create a bike that meets the demands of modern WorldTour racing.

Van Rysel’s new concept bike is a head-turner, but what’s it for?While other brands are making cuts, the French brand is showcasing its design chops by unveiling a bike no one can (yet) buy.Escape CollectiveSuvi Loponen

At its core, the bike is aggressive in its geometry, with deep aero profiles that make the most of the UCI’s aero regulations. There’s an aero-optimised head tube, dropped aero-profile stays, and a deep down tube. In this respect, at first glance, it has all the trademarks of an aero race bike.

With such a heavy focus on racing, the main question I had was whether the RCR-F was a viable option for keen recreational riders and club racers or whether it overstepped the mark, making it purely the reserve of the elite athlete.

Over my time with the bike, I’ve been testing the RCR-F Pro Dura-Ace, and in April last year, I also got some time on the entry-level 105 build, allowing me to compare the most affordable to the most expensive options in the RCR-F range.

The short of it: Van Rysel’s dedicated aero bike is a racer's bike. An aggressive position and a firm ride make its intentions clear. This is one to avoid if you’re not regularly putting on a skinsuit and aero socks.

Highs: The bike is noticeably fast, and it holds its speed with absolute efficiency. The ergo drops make riding in this position comfortable for extended periods. It's a racer's bike that doesn't try to work for the mass-markets too.

Lows: The price delta between the Shimano 105 Di2 and Dura-Ace models is hard to justify. With no options to swap cockpit, the aggressive reach and stack limits ability to fine-tune fit. The ride is firm, bordering on harsh. A 26 mm front tyre feels like a wrong, or at least dated, choice.

Price: US$12,000 / £10,000 / €9,500 (with Shimano Dura-Ace)

A quick rundown

Before we get into the details of the review, here are the key stats on the RCR-F:

• Available in three Shimano Di2 builds: 105, Ultegra, and Dura-Ace
• A size range from XXS-XL claims to cover riders from <155 cm / 5'1" to 196 cm / 6'5" tall
• New super-deep one-piece cockpit
• Claimed to be 13 watts faster than the RCR-R Pro at 45 km/h
• 32 mm tyre clearance

Aero is everything, almost all of the time

The deep head tube, which smoothly flows into an equally deep down tube, makes the intentions of the bike abundantly clear. The RCR-F shares nothing with the silhouette of its RCR-R sibling. Where the RCR-R aims to be a jack of all trades, the RCR-F has one clear objective: to be as fast as possible through the wind.

The head tube is deep and short. Van Rysel says this design at the front end is responsible for a large proportion of the bike's aero improvement over the RCR-R.

Van Rysel engineers collaborated with longstanding brand partner Swiss Side to simulate different race profiles, factoring in elevation gain, wind, race speed, rider role, weight, and power. This holistic approach aimed to design for real racing conditions, not just isolated wind tunnel runs.

Van Rysel says the RCR-F is fastest on high-speed, flat-to-rolling courses with under 1,500 metres of climbing per 100 km (about 5,000 feet in 60 miles) and where average speeds are above 35 km/h or 22 mph – essentially, anywhere aerodynamics matter more than weight.

As much as these points make sense for an aero bike, the first point is problematic for the Van Rysel range. An elevation gain of 1,500 metres per 100 km is a big number. For reference, Amstel Gold hits 1,250 m per 100 km, and that’s considered hilly.

Compared to the RCR-R, the fork on the RCR-F is noticeably deeper in the hunt for drag reductions, but with it comes an increase in stiffness.

In this sense, the RCR-F has sidelined the RCR-R for the overwhelming majority of races. Even high mountain stages in Grand Tours can be won with an average speed hovering around 35 km/h, making for very few cases in which the RCR-R is the right choice – at least, if you're a pro.

Who is this bike for that isn’t a pro?

For amateur racers comfortable in aggressive positions and riding at 35 km/h or more, the RCR-F makes sense and might even be exactly what you have been looking for. It avoids trying to serve double duties as a race bike and as a viable bike for a large portion of the consumer market; instead, the RCR-F has remained firmly single-minded – a bike built for pro racing.

For those who have an eye on comfort, spending time on the tops, and social cruising, it will likely be too extreme; for weekend riders or sportive cyclists who want a forgiving ride, there are options out there far better suited to your needs, including the RCR-R.

While for the general public, this bike has limited appeal, I commend Van Rysel's singularly focused approach with the RCR-F. Sure, it won't sell in the same quantities as the Specialized Tarmac SL8 or Canyon Aeroad, but it is a bold move to create a bike with the sole purpose of winning races.

Compared to the RCR-R, Van Rysel (with Swiss Side) claims the RCR-F saves 13 W at 45 km/h (no bottles/cages) and 20.1 W at 55 km/h (the latter is measured with bottles/cages, making comparisons messy).

And then there is the riding position. Compared to the RCR-R, the stack is 11 mm lower for the same reach in my size. While Van Rysel leaves enough steerer for some fit adjustment, if you already run spacers, this will be a tough fit.

While the RCR-F does come with some level of stack adjustment, if you already have your bars raised, you might struggle to dial in the right fit on the RCR-F depending on the frame size you require.

As a rule: if you can’t ride an hour in the drops or with 90° elbows on your current bike, the RCR-F will feel uncomfortable at best, unrideable at worst.

Wind tunnel tests by Van Rysel and Swiss Side confirmed body position matters far more than frame tweaks. Deviating from the 90º elbow position at 45 km/h comes at a significant cost.

• Straight arms on hoods: +63.6 W drag
• Straight arms on drops: +27.1 W drag

In other words, the riding position you can hold dwarfs the aero savings of frame shapes. Something to hold in mind when deciding if the RCR-F and its geometry are for you.

Geometry poses some fit questions

Looking at the RCR-F’s geometry chart is a must, but it also raises questions around fit, especially for smaller riders. The frame itself is long; in fact, the XS RCR-F has a longer reach than a 54 cm Tarmac SL8, with a stack some 40 mm lower.

The only frame sizes that fall within the realm of its competition when plotting reach and stack measurements are the size large, which closely matches a medium Canyon Aeroad, large Colnago Y1Rs, and 56 cm Cervelo S5 and the medium RCR-F, which correlates to a small Canyon Aeroad.

From the L up to the XL, the reach and stack both jump considerably from 399 mm and 561 mm to 412 mm and 585 mm. This increase in reach between the L and XL is the same as the jump from the XS to the L.

This post is for subscribers only

Become a member to get access to all content

Subscribe now