Introducing the RONDO RUUT. A performance orientated Gravel bike with variable geometry, and some very strange and divisive features. We discuss the frame construction and it’s Twin Tip for design. I take it for a ride in the Lake District and try to figure out quite what and who this bike was designed for.
The bike is the Rondo RUUT CF1 G2 with the SRAM Rival Groupset and the Hunt wheels
The wheels I swapped to were my hand-built WTB i27 carbon rims on DT Swiss Hubs, wrapped in 44c Vittoria Mezcal.
I’m wearing a Duel Long Sleeve Jersey from ALÉ, a lightweight thermal jersey designed for gravel riding. You can find it here: https://alecycling.com/en/products/long-sleeve-jersey-man-dual-25-019?_pos=2&_psq=dual&_ss=e&_v=1.0
Learn more about the bike here: https://rondo.cc/ruut-cf1-g2,676,pl
Thanks to Adaptive DCS Ltd for the loan of the bike for this review. No incentive or money was paid for any part of this review.
40 Comments
I don't take those bike brands seriously if the come up with a flawed design.
That’s one ugly bike.
Acros was the biggest heap of shit problem no one asked for. Been a pain since the early days.
Hello, what saddle is that?
That's not a triangle. Even my 2018 Checkpoint fits 50mm tires, have they learnt nothing in 6 years?
Monstrosity.
I owned a Rondo and it’s the worst bike I’ve ever had. Bottom bracket problems, brake mounts not flush, seat post slippage and a rear wheel pulled the nipple through the rim. Luckily I live in Belfast and CRC had a shop, and they did fix it but three warrenty frames later and I sold it.
Bit of an eyesore in my opinion. Lots of geotech that might or maybe not needed, not skilled enough to comment😁👍
I wonder if the interrupted seatstay is meant to introduce some compliance? I just know I'd bang my knees on that top tube and the head tube just looks weird. I do like the stem and slightly challenging styling but it would be a pass for me.
looks ugly, IMHO. Would send it to Hambini 😅
A truly shocking contraption. Pretty sure I’ve seen some nice bikes made by Rondo but someone has taken leave of their senses here.
Modern bike designers are doing everything in their power to undo all the hard work our forefathers carried out. I’m all for quirky design if it facilitates tangible benefits I.E. Canyon have done some whacky designs which improve the ride experience and they always seem to pull it off as it’s tastefully executed. However in this case I cannot see the benefits of the weird frame shape and other ‘design features’. God help us.
Hideous, directionless, poor spec…pick 3!
They lost me at the proprietary headset. On a road bike, it's already an eh for me. On a gravel bike, where dirt, grit, and rain can wreck bearings like they're nothing? Yeah no.
man, it's ugly! Also at 7m45s you imply a cybertruck is an off road vehicle. haven't you seen the multitude of videos by now of those things absolutely failing at going through water or up a hill? it's probably better than a cybertruck at going through puddles! 😉
No music when talking please WHY…..can't hear the presenter 🤦
I wouldn't know………I'll never ever gonna get that……I mean, me getting a Cyclo-Cross bike? no thank you.
UGLY!
I'm all for bikes doing things differently in pursuit of a specific flavour – I have a Lauf Seigla which IMO is a perfect example of making small/inconsequential design sacrifices for significant gain (e.g. not having a seat tube that intersects with the BB for more clearance at the loss of UCI accreditation, using SRAM Wide BB/BSA 73mm for more clearance and external routing on the fork for the suspension to work, using damped bearings to neutralise the inherent lower lateral stiffness of a fork on a floating pivot).
This bike however feels like it makes about 10 points in compromise to gain 1 point in performance. Terrible rear end structure for a miniscule -5mm chain stay vs. many other gravel bikes and still has pretty middle of the lane tyre clearance. The flip chip system that isn't necessary considering the rear end seems like it only marries up to one of the modes (the high one it seems).
I'd not heard that about proprietary headset bearings in relation to Canyon, good info to know for any decisions on future bike shortlists. Thanks 👍
Rondo has another model of gravel bike that takes larger tires and has slacker head angles. This bike is meant to be the racier bike.
This bike frame reminds me of house builders who try to construct a house the cheapest and least ambitious standards, but market it as ‘modern’, ‘upscale’ or ‘stylish’ and charge top dollar for it to millionaires who are completely clueless.
looks kinda like an ebike. The flat headtube doesn't look very good at all imo, Way too chunky..like an ebike.
Turd
That fork is a beast. Nothing aero about it ffs 🙂
Bike Radar->Mapdec->Hambini->scrappile ;>
I guess I'll keep my Giant Revolt Advanced 2.
The headset area is not necessarily a poor aerodynamic shape. With the sorts of Reynolds numbers you're dealing with it could very well not matter, or trip airflow in a way that may be beneficial. It really depends what it was designed for
Was the Bianchi Volpe the first gravel bike? I know there is a difference between cyclocross and gravel bikes but I don't know what it is, lol! This bike is something else entirely,
Why would anyone buy this bike? I am scratching my head on this. I picked up a Lauf Seigla Rigid this year after selling my Crux. The bike is excellence and a great deal. Popped some 2.1 Racekings on it for BC trails.
That bike weighs more then my full suspension XC bike. Not sure where the 'race' comes into play here. The design seems unfocused, the engineering equivalent of trying too hard at being unique and not being particularly good at anything. The Cybertruck comparison is apt.
Odd design decisions because they don't seem to have any benefit. Guess it all comes down to whether you fancy one or not.
The frame design is similar to 2023 Specialized Sirrus X 5.0 / 6.0
The biggest miss with the aesthetics of the bike is the round seatpost. The whole bike is very bulkyand square, the skinny round seatpost totally breaks that synergie. A similarly bulky, D-shaped post would have made the look complete.
Of couse, I know that they did it to make it dropper-post compatible, but with this tyre clearence you don't really need a dropper in this bike…
Seems like another case of design for design sake.
3:15 flip chip for gravel , front wheel !
Gravel bikes are a joke anyway
I tested it for a local magazine. Very cyclocrossy. Jumped high, stiff, nimble quite light.
I tried twin tip trailside just to se haw bad is it. The caliper alignment was challenging. Slack position tracked nicely on wide loose turns. Steep position is much sharper around middle, but more nervous in those wide loose turns.
Hub dragged a lot while freewheeling.
Its possible to mount 2x with adapter.
Fully agree on Spank components!
I think kink in the top tube is a way to get sloping and expose seatpost. Maybe good for CX bike carry as well.
DEFINITELY bicycle designed more by graphic designer than mechanical designer.
Very little mud clearance at the back – not much use in the UK unless you use it like most 4x4s in the UK and never go off-road.
This bike look beautiful . 99.9 % of bikes look same. This is pearl. Super
Absolutely no way I’d ride something like that!