All 20 Tour de France bike brands ranked from worst value to best, exposing which sixteen thousand dollar bikes are really just badges and paint.

This ranking breaks down every brand racing this year’s Tour using four criteria: real engineering data, price-to-performance, service and support, and honesty in pricing. You will see why Pogacar’s Colnago lands at the bottom of the value list despite being the most expensive bike in the peloton, why a wildcard Spanish team riding a lower groupset tier turns out to be one of the most honest builds in the race, and why a supermarket owned brand ends up beating every heritage name in the sport.

Along the way we dig into wind tunnel numbers, dealer networks, warranty realities, and the marketing tax baked into some of cycling’s most famous names. If you have ever wondered whether an expensive bike is actually faster or just better branded, this is the breakdown that answers it with facts instead of vibes.

Subscribe for straight-talking breakdowns of the bike industry that cut through marketing and get to what your money is actually buying.

What’s in your garage right now, and did you choose it for the engineering or for the story painted on it? Drop it in the comments.

Share.

20 Comments

  1. Not a great video. No apparent methodology to distinguish, for example, No. 14 from No 11. No consideration of manufacturing quality. Price isn't the only consideration. Some of your low-ranked brands are expensive in part because they're manufactured to tighter tolerances and higher engineering standards than most brands–and these brands tend to own and run their own factories, which is more expensive than using some third-party Chinese or Taiwanese manufacturer. So in some cases (not all), you get what you pay for; completely agree that some brands charge a price premium for a name without the quality. Interesting that Raja is running Ultegra–I didn't know that. And thanks for omitting Canyon–a crap brand cheaply made in China according to low standards and with only a six-year warranty.

  2. Excellent video. I love that you gave us your opinion and didn’t try to hedge. I hate the “it depends” dodge that so many use to dodge giving a committed opinion. Thank you

  3. Based on a video I saw 2 weeks ago, Factor has a small factory, run by 2 women who are the best at working with carbon fiber, turn out 10 bikes a week, max. He has these 2 make road and TT bikes for teams and riders sponsored by Factor. Wonder how many others do this? Trek used to have their engineers and designers mfg their team bikes, but have Giant (or maybe Sarto? I wonder) make them now.

  4. Doesn't make you faster uphill….doesnt make your sunday rides faster….who said I want to be faster? I want to ride the bike I want to ride and I am ready to pay whatever they ask for it. I ride bike because I love riding bikes not because I am racing.

  5. Current bikes are lighter and faster compared to the bikes of the 80’s and 90’s, but not necessarily better. Bikes of today better be, because if not, then all the E&D and technology put into the sport is a complete utter failure. It is a sport with a machine involved in it, this isn’t footie (not knocking footie of course), and that’s one of the sport’s weaknesses, that machine called the bike. I just wonder what bikes will be like in 25 years. Somewhat different but not so much maybe. The rear derailleur now is exactly the same component as it was from the 80’s (Campy C Record the metric), same springs same behaviour same performance, just now lighter. I don’t like bikes of today, many of us vintage junkies don’t, and it’s not because we’re (vintage) bike snobs

Leave A Reply