NEW Cervelo S5 & R5 Road Bikes At The 2025 Tour de France

Cervelo’s engineering manager talks us through the two new road bikes that Cervelo has brought to the 2025 Tour de France. Jonas Vingegaard and co. have two new road bikes to use – one aero road bike and one lightweight road bike!

The Cervelo S5 is often considered one of the best aero bikes – can this new Cervelo S5 keep it at the top? We’ve also spotted a new lightweight Cervelo R5 climbing bike which Jonas Vingegaard will be hoping will give him an advantage in the 2025 Tour de France mountain stages.

Let us know what you think of the new Cervelo S5 and new Cervelo R5 road bikes in the comments below…

We may earn a commission when purchasing through affiliate links in this description.

Subscribe to Cycling Weekly here: https://www.youtube.com/user/CyclingWeekly1?sub_confirmation=1

More at:
Cycling Weekly: http://www.cyclingweekly.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CyclingWeekly
Instagram: https://instagram.com/cyclingweeklymagazine
Twitter: http://twitter.com/cyclingweekly
Email: cycling@futurenet.com

#cycling #bikes #bicycles

Well, here we’re here at the Tour to France at the Vizma Lisa bike trucks and uh we’ve spotted not one but two new bikes and to talk us through them is Sello uh design engineer
engineering manager.
Engineering manager. Um so here we’ve got Jonas Finger’s Sello S5. But this isn’t the S5 that he’s been riding for the last few years, is it?
No. No. Um so if you can just tell us a few few things about it. What’s changed? I think right off the bat everyone’s noticed the one piece cockpit. Um so uh the whole bike is brand new. Um every every tube has been refined um with the goal of of increasing our aero performance over the competition. Um in order to make a fast bike handle well and and and respond the same way. It’s it’s a very difficult thing to do and keep the stiffness high. By increasing arrow performance, you usually make a bike heavier.
Mhm.
Larger cord sections add more weight. Um, so in order to do that there’s there’s things that we’ve done. So if you look at the one piece cockpit driver for the one piece cockpack is actually weight.
Yeah. The subset of that would be aerero performance because you’re cleaning up that front end. You’re cleaning up the interfaces between the stem and the handlebar. Um, so we’ve saved about 100 grams in the front end. Another big thing that everyone’s noticed is is the cord section of the fork.
Yeah, that looks quite deep.
Exactly. So the head tube and the fork uh itself have gotten deeper and the cord length the whole way down the legs have gotten deeper. Um, a lot of our gains were in that um, for the system. Um, so overall the bike is about six 6.3 6 and a half watts faster um, than the outgoing S5.
What speed is that?
About 30 mph.
Okay.
Wind tunnel testing. So um, I’m sure everyone’s aware. Uh, it’s it’s it scales. So the faster you go, the more of a benefit you get from the performance. It helps absolutely bit. Hey mate, how are you?
Good. And you?
You’re on camera though. This is going to be good. say hi.
Oh, that’s okay. Um,
you were filming. You were
No, you join in. You can also Yeah.
Um, yeah. So, every every little bit will help. Um, so and that’s that’s that’s basically our job is to always make riders faster. Um, and and it’s the we look at the 1 percenters, we sweat over the 1enters. So, um, yeah, I think it’s it’s it’s not an easy task. Um, it’s been a it’s been a long project. Um, and it’s it’s was under the writers first at DOE. I think that’s when it’s not the first time they’ve written it. So, when it’s the first time public saw it. Um, we’ll do better next year.
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And this snuck through as well. So, um, we had this in a couple of stages at under SE at Zopane and and no one no one really noticed it, which was was really good.
Sorry guys, that’s our bad.
But yeah, it’s nice to see nice to see a little prototype using
always like that. And uh so Yonas’s bike size 51, is that right?
Yes, correct.
And uh he’s obviously got the deep reserve wheels. I know that Yonas really likes riding the S5 even on some mountain stages. So do you reckon that’s going to change this year with the with the new R5? Potentially. Um so one of the big changes to the R5 was we’ve normalized the fit now between the two bikes. Okay. So uh previous generations, uh the handling characteristics of the bike will remain the same.
Yeah.
Uh versus the old R5. Um but a direct request from the team was normalize the fit numbers between the two bikes. So, the bike itself has gotten lower and it’s gotten longer. Uh, so if you jump on it, it in Yonas’s case is 51 S5, you can jump back onto the 51 R5 and feel exactly well fit exactly the same.
And it’s the R5 that’s changed to the S5.
Correct. Yes.
Um, there’s a few other interesting uh little specifics that I’ve seen on this bike. 160 mil cranks.
Yeah. Yeah. Uh there is uh ongoing experiments with us and the team and ShraMM on on crank length and optimizing um fit and power output. Um I don’t want to get into too much detail on that but uh it’s interesting that is involved in that process.
Absolutely. Yeah. Because I think it’s it’s it’s never going to be an isolated occurrence. Right. If we are able to go and find that there is a benefit for shorter crank lengths then we can we can drop the bottom bracket. can change the fit geometry and the handling geometry of the bike to better suit these setups.
Um, so absolutely uh it’s a it’s a really close collaboration with us and and the team in in in optimizing for that.
Yeah, I didn’t realize that that was the case. That’s really cool. I’ve also noticed some really lightweight hardware up here. Uh the bolts are titanium, but the cross the cross bars themselves are aluminium. Um so as I mentioned, everything was looked over with a fine tooth comb. So the the the seat post profiles between the two bikes remain the same.
Um the manufacturing process that we used and the layup slightly changed so we could pull out some weight. Um so the post itself got about 30 the post and the hardware got about 30 g lighter normally on both bikes. Um there’s a carbon cradle as well instead of our old aluminium cradle. Um and it it might not seem like much but uh when you think about a pendulum and the lower the weight around the bottom bracket the better, right? So if you’ve got weight high up in a system,
yeah,
in a long unseated climb, it eventually adds up to pretty significant um energy loss. So rotational weight
essentially. It’s huge. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, it’s not huge. Relatively, it’s 30 grams. It’s not much, but every little bit will will add up.
Yeah. When you’re racing at that level.
Exactly.
And so we’ve got a second new bike over here, the R5.
Um I must admit, it looks quite familiar. Yes. It looks quite a lot a like generation, but
these are really skinny. Um it also looks quite similar to the 2013. Absolutely.
Um of course that was rim bra and this one is
correct.
Yep. Um so we’re limited a lot in what we can do from a manufacturing standpoint to get the weight down. Right. So there is limited by UCI
UCI um the current manufacturing processes, the current materials that we have. So that very first generation R5 Rimman disc back in 20 uh 20 or 16 when we had the the disc one come out as well um
kind of hit on a shape profile that was really optimized for balance of stiffness and weight. So we can make a
in making a really a bike you make an arrow bike it will be heavier. So you have to remember to be like okay we need to keep the weight down and we need to keep stiffness up. The opposite of that is in reducing weight you lose you can lose a lot of bottom brackets stiff head head tube stiffness. So you’ve got to be cognizant of that when you you start pulling weight out of the frame. So
um
the team uh spent a lot of time in FA optimizing tube shapes very I would say refining the tube shapes that we’ve already discovered back in 2016 that were really good structurally. Um every single tube on the bike is unique and different. Um the seat tube top the seat stay uh top tube junction got a little bit higher the top tube a little bit narrower. This is also why it kind of snuck through in DNA and no one noticed because it is very
very familiar.
So raising raising this junction will that not mean shorter seat post and therefore less comfortable.
Uh so yes in short yes um what we had found um from feedback from the riders at Bisma uh was we were getting a little we almost added too much compliance in the previous generation bike. So for any nonprofessional rider it was a good thing. Um but what we were finding was seated efforts uh the feedback at least in seated efforts we had a little bit of side to side sway. Um so increasing that top tube junction we were able to reduce that slightly um as well as then with the seat the layup in the seat post itself not lose any of the vertical compliance front to back compliance. So um
little changes like that is that direct feedback we have with the team. So, um, absolutely. Yeah. So, the the the post itself, like I mentioned with this, uh, optimize the manufacturing layout for that. The hardware, so the cradle and the crossarss and the bolts themselves are the same between the two bikes.
Um, like you pointed out with the seat stays, uh,
they’re not dropped either.
No.
Which is a rarity these days, I would say. It’s got a quite classic line.
Absolutely. And I think it’s it’s what we talked about where structurally this is the most efficient shape for what this bike is. So, we have very unique tools for very unique Sol very very unique solutions for specific cases. Um
and in this case we are optimizing weight and stiffness. Um and in that case this is where we’re finding the best structural solution to be. Um that also then plays into the benefit of manufacturing. So if you’re able to work in this cyclical shape of optimize for error, optimize for structure, design for manufacturing, you’re able to pull out all these 1% gains. So um
and I believe the UCI the 10 mil limit. Yeah,
they look like they bang on.
Yeah, on the limit with paint. So, um yeah, we really with paint. Yeah. So,
can you explain that to us?
They are.
So, they’re a bit skinny and then they’re painted to bring them up to it. Is that essentially it we’re talking decimal points of millimeters. Uh but that’s that’s the case of where we are uh with trying to get the weight out of this bike and trying to really push the boundaries of it.
But is paint not heavier than carbon? Not necessarily. No, that is a that is
Yeah.
Pushing the limits that, isn’t it?
Absolutely.
I’ve also noticed on the front brake caliper, you’ve got the bolts coming all the way through the front for
Yes. So, um
weight saving.
Absolutely. Yeah. Uh the same approach that we have for the rear brake mount um where it’s an open tube, bolts go through. Um we kind of had a moment where like why why don’t we do that on the front? So, um, having comolded aluminium in a fork is generally heavier. Um, with the shape restrictions of this fork, um, you’re limited to how much internal how how deep that internal bladder can go. So, in carbon, you have an internal bag that blows up and you have an external mold and heat and pressure and then you get a nice part. Um, in removing that and opening that section up, you’re able to get the bag all the way down. So, you’re able to remove all that redundant material that was there. Um, so as I mentioned earlier, as a percentage of weight saving, it’s huge. For a fork that’s 300 grams, taking almost 20 grams out of that is a pretty big saving. So,
what are the claim weights for this bike? Are you able to share them?
Yeah, absolutely. So, the a painted 56. Uh, so we always quote 56. Um, always being except for the P series or a P5 where we’ll look at a 54. Um, R5, S5, all these bikes are always a 56. Uh 650 g frame painted and a 300 g fork. Um
well under the sub kilo.
Oh, easy. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah.
And then complete bikes. Well, I guess they’re these ones are going to be built up to the
UCI 6.8. Yeah. Uh no, we have a we have a bike in the office uh that we’ve built, not exotic parts. Um ShraMM one by setup and it’s a 56 and about six bang on six kilos, 5.95. um with no power meter but one by and and speed Victoria speed tires. So
So I guess that just leads me on to one more question has sort of doubled down on it two bike approach two bike race bike approach
y
and we’ve seen lots of other manufacturers going to one bike to rule them all
you know the terminology and things.
So can you just explain to us why you think this is the best way forwards? Um,
yeah,
because you’ll always have a compromise. There’ll always be a condition in a certain race where you don’t have the best tool for the job. Um, it’s not the easiest solution. It’s it’s hard. It’s harder than having one bike. Um, then we also offer a bike that does that in the Soloist. Um, so there are there are races and there are cases where that does work and there are cases where this is the bot of choice and that is more specific for that and I think that’s that’s part of our ethos. We’re always there to make riders faster and we’re always there to make the best tool for the job. So um
can see the like real attention to detail. I know you realize they’re using a Garmin 840 in on the flat stages and then they’ve got the 140 I think it’s 140. Yeah, 130 140 the baby one just to save a bit more weight. Absolutely. Yeah.
Crazy.
And it’s I mean it’s that that goes to show you how how where we also get pushed right where it’s working.
It truly is a a beneficial relationship being with Bisma because where they’re that level of detail is what the expectation for us is now.
Um so it’s great. It’s good for us.
They look like cool bikes and looking forward to seeing how they get on.
Likewise. Thank you.
Cheers.