Worst Cycling Trends Of 2026 - Light Bikes, Aero, Integration, Bib Shorts & Brands Missing The Mark

Oh, I do love a rant. And there have of course been plenty of great developments in cycling

Bikes are now more aero, more versatile, more capable than ever before. But there has been

plenty of developments that seem like steps in the wrong direction. So here's some things

that I hope don't make it to 2026. This is Cycling Weekly. Let's get into it

We'll kick off with one of my biggest bugbears. Aero profile tubing on non-aero bikes. Now

don't get me wrong. I love an aero bike. Aero bikes have a time and a place. And if you want

to cut through the air like a knife, then you are going to need some aero profile tube shapes

probably designed in a wind tunnel. What grinds my gears is bikes that have never seen a wind

tunnel. They're never going to be ridden at more than 30 kilometers an hour, for example

some gravel bikes. And yet they still have D-shaped seat tubes and seat posts and aero profile down

tubes. Like why? I know why. And it's purely for aesthetics. But the downside is that it makes a

bike worse to ride, which I think is quite important. The thing with aero profile tubes

is that they're like an eye beam. So they're really stiff in one direction

and not necessarily in another. And that makes a bike less compliant

So the sooner we'll realize that a round profile tube is actually a really bloody good way

of combining stiffness, compliance, and low weight, the better. Next on my list is light bib shorts

No, not low weight bib shorts. They're fine as long as they're not see-through

but the light colored bib shorts, you know, the ones that you always see on Instagram these days

the influencers are always wearing. And I think that's half the problem. They're designed for

pure form over function. So I saw a set. I thought I'd really like them. I think they look really

good. And so I got a set and then I went out on a bike ride. It was summer to be fair. And I did

an effort up a hill and when I got to the top it looked literally like I'd wet myself. Now I'm not

a profuse sweater and I have been probably a bit weird since that and just gone around looking at

other people's crotches but it's not just a me problem. There is so many people wearing light

bib shorts that are going out on rides and looking like they wet themselves or had an accident down

their backside or cycling inherently, you are going to sweat or you are going to get grubby

And light bib shorts satisfy neither of those. I know Ineos have just gone for their light bib

shorts. I personally think they actually look quite good. Apart from they don't actually match

the jersey and they look good now in a studio photo. Will they look good at the end of Paris

Roubaix? Probably not. And I am going to call out the influencers for this. They look great

on Instagram. I reckon none of the influencers are actually riding their bikes. They can't be

because otherwise they would have the same sweat patches as everyone else So let me know what you think whether you agree or disagree down in the comments below Is it just a me problem or is this just giving more ammunition to actual normal people who already think our cyclists are

pretty damn weird right you knew it was going to be here didn't you integrated cockpits they look

great they're less fun if you've ever had to do any maintenance on your own bike the other day i

was there with my brake hoses for hours trying to get them through impossibly small holes in the

bars. That isn't actually my gripe with them. Fair enough, if you want to save a minuscule amount of

watts by hiding your cables, cool. I also think it looked really clean. Brilliant. That's fine on an

aero bike. On other bikes, does it really make any difference? Probably not. You can find far bigger

gains from well moving your hands or your head. An absolutely microscopic amount would make more

difference than having internally routed cabling. My biggest problem with them though is the fact

that they're attached to the stem which sounds really obvious but if you fall off and or your

bike falls over then you now have to replace your bar and your stem. You can't just replace one of

them. The other thing is bike fit. Bike fit will make far bigger difference to your speed and comfort

on the bike than anything else you can do to your bike. Any upgrade that you could make is far

outweighed by your bike fit. And an integrated cockpit really limits that fit. Not only do

manufacturers not offer it in enough sizes, they also seem to be out of stock the entire time

and then when it comes to changing because your bike fit will change all of our bike fits change

over time you will potentially have not ridden as much in the last year and two years later

your bike fit is going to change to when you set up your bike now you want to change your position

ever so slightly and great that's going to be 500 pounds please no thank you very much

I just don't think it's worth it so there's my opinion on integrated cockpits whether you ask

for it or not right I've slated aero tubing already and now I'm going to share around the

hate onto super lightweight bikes too um because I'm basically just on a roll of seeing how many

of you I can piss off as possible there is absolutely no need for anyone buying their own

bike to be on a 600 gram frame. Let me explain. For most of us, weight makes absolutely no

difference when out on the bike. Not the weight of your bike anyway. A bike potentially weighs

7 kilograms, 10 kilograms, maybe even 12 kilograms. The average human weighs significantly more than

that. And the result is that your bike is going to be maybe 10% of your total system weight

and therefore saving even 500 grams which could cost you a fortune is not really going to be very

significant in the grand scheme of things. You'd be far better focused on getting comfortable

putting out more watts and potentially being more aero. Now I don't have anything against

some lightweight bikes but taking it that one step further for example a Lab71 or an S these really special carbon layups brilliant for the pros that are trying to find these microscopic gains But for the rest of

us, why do we want to be riding around on really, they're not really fragile, but they are more

fragile than the ones that are 200 grams heavier? For what benefit? Next to none. Now, sure, you

don't have to go out and buy one. No one is forcing you to go and buy one of these bikes

But the marketing departments do seem to like to push them quite hard. They are trying to tell you

that there is a benefit when I don't think for most people there is. So what I'd much rather is

a pros and cons list. If each manufacturer could give you a pros and cons list of each bike rather

than just all the pros. That's never going to happen, is it? And that does sort of lead me on

to speaking of marketing departments, brands pushing the wrong kind of bike. We recently did

a video where we went to the Van Riesel store and it was sort of tackling this problem head on

because according to the bike fitter at Van Riesel, 80 to 90% of the customers that come

through his door should be or are better suited to endurance geometry than race bike geometry

And yet brands are adamant that the best way to sell bikes is to say, ah, but Pogaccio rides this

one, Sagan used to ride this one, or Evinopol rides this one, for example. And it's like trying

to do the school run in an F1 car. It's great that you can buy it, but that doesn't mean you should

There are far better tools for the job. The thing that I think often gets missed with endurance bike geometry is that it doesn't mean you're going to go slower

It doesn't mean they're not sit up and beg bikes. They have aero profile tubing

They have these integrated cables if that's what you want. I think the easiest way to explain this is your back or your hamstrings and hip flexors

have a certain degree of movement. And when you're on the bike, they're going to find what's comfortable

Now, if you have much lower handlebars, then what happens is your hands go lower or they

come higher as you change your handlebar position. It doesn't necessarily mean that you're actually going to get in a more aerodynamic position

if that makes any sense at all. So actually on a race bike, some of us might be slower

because as you do that and lower your hands, you actually open up more of your arms

to the oncoming wind. And that's why on TT bikes, we're now seeing everyone actually

bring their front ends much, much higher to try and close that gap. So I don't think that

endurance road bikes are actually much slower. There are some excellent options out there. The

Canyon Dura-Ace, the Factor Monza sort of tackles this, the Giant Defy, absolutely excellent bike

And I could sit here all day listing tens more, but will the majority of people go out and buy

them No probably not because brands are pushing their race bikes If you want to hear me tell some more hard fruits of cycling then make sure you hit that subscribe button

We can do light-hearted too. What else annoys me? Oh, I've got another one

Pencil cases. You know the bar bags that go under your handlebars

Oh, well, no, this is a good example. why are people not using top tube bags instead of bar bags? If you need a bar bag and you've

already got a saddle pack, a top tube bag, you've used potentially your spare bottle cage or etc

then fine have a bar bag. But there's a lot of people, mainly they're all riding around Richmond

Park, riding around with pencil cases under their bars and then nothing else on their bikes. Sometimes

not even a water bottle. Sometimes no saddle bag or nothing in their pockets. And they are all much

better places to store things, in my opinion. A bar bag, it's got the potential to rub your frame

It kind of limits where you can put your hands. They wobble about, the ones I have used do

because it's not a physical mounting point. You just strap it to your bars. If you need them

fine. If you're using one just for the aesthetic on your 15k gravel ride, then fit your stuff

somewhere else. And finally, I know this is going to be a big one. The other thing that I hope

doesn't make it into 2026 is baggy tubeless tires. I know that tubeless tires, hookless wheels

etc are a very controversial topic. I personally don't think there is anything inherently wrong

with hookless. I know that there's going to be lots of angry people in the comments

I think that it's technology that we should be capable of making work. Does it work

No, I don't think we're at a point where it's safe enough for us to go out and use it or for

for me to recommend it to the average rider out there, my friends and family, for example

And I think the main culprit for that is tyre manufacturers. They have literally, in most

cases, one job, and that is to make a tyre and make it the right size. And yet you get your new

set of tubeless wheels, you get three tyres, and they're all different sizes. Some of them

absolutely pop on, they're too baggy, and other ones are a right faff to try and get on, but at

least when they are on, they're probably going to stay on and they're easier to inflate. So to all

the tyre manufacturers making baggy tubeless tyres, you're ruining it for the rest of us

Everyone that I know has a story either from themselves or someone that they know having a

poor experience with tubeless tyres. We should be able to make a bit of rubber the right size for

a standard sized wheel. So that one's probably a bit more serious than the others. Let me know any

of the tech trends that you think should make it into room 101 in the comments below. Apologies if

you don't get the reference. And also let me know whether you agree or disagree with any of my

rants down below. Make sure you're subscribed to the channel for another year of all things cycling

and we'll see you next time. Good to get that off my chest. I feel much better now