Best Racing Gravel Bike 2025

I wasn’t going to entertain buying a new gravel rig this year as I was hoping a new Revolt would drop at some point, but that seems unlikely.

So, I found a barely used 2022 Revolt for about 1K nearby. I have the 2020 but the idea of being able to safely run 50s, 2.1s is very appealing. Don’t care about UDH or frame storage. I do care about clearance and the option to run 2.1s at some point.

Also the sizing for the newer gen (22-25), small is basically the previous gen medium which I have dialed fit wise.

It’s either than or a Seigla

1 Like

Speed holes

1 Like

Like dimples but faster

1 Like

The forward bolt is a hex head, not a socket cap… So a small(likely 8mm) wrench would get in there, or its as simple as loosening the rear bolt a couple turns, removing tension from the cradle, and then use your finger to turn the front bolt either direction, and use the rear bolt to re-tension everything… Specialized’s Alpinist and SL8 seat posts use a similar layout, with small holes drilled in the tapered head, but you don’t torque them down via those holes, you do as above, and use a paper clip or 2mm hex key, and leave the final torque and clamping force to the rear bolt.

3 Likes

I just got a new gravel bike for the purpose of starting to do some races(including unbound and big sugar this year.) I had a grail that I was previously riding and was a lot of fun, but my daughter took it over. I ended up going with an orbea Terra. But I dont see it mentioned here. Thoughts?

Watching all the You Tube videos of The Traka gravel race in Spain, there were a lot of Orbea gravel bikes there. My friend has one of their road bikes and loves it.

A slightly niche one, but I recently bought a Propain Terrel CF. Couple of training rides so far and she can move. First “race” this weekend so will see how she compares.

5 Likes

Review of new Seigla after first race -
I raced Rule of 3 (117 mile course) on the Seigla yesterday in Bentonville. The race is an ideal test for any bike since it mixes lots of single track, smooth gravel, chunky loose gravel, and road. My setup was conti race king 2.2’s on 303 FC’s, SRAM transmission and 42t chainring. Profile design aero bars. Lauf suspension fork and Ergon suspension seat post (same seat post Canyon uses on some of their gravel bikes). I did the same race on my Gen2 checkpoint running 47 pathfinder pros last year with a redshift suspension stem, so that’s my primary point of comparison. My main reason for switching bikes was to get more tire clearance, but I also liked the idea of proper suspension (vs. the redshift stem I’ve been running).

On the road sections, I feel the 2.2’s dragging a bit, but there wasn’t that much road. In every other situation, the Seigla felt faster. Maybe just a little faster on the smooth gravel, but dramatically faster on chunky gravel and noticeably faster (or at least less scary and fatiguing) on the single track. For anyone who hasn’t raced around Bentonville, it has a bunch of really chunky/loose/fast gravel descents, often with corners at the bottom. Mostly in tree canopy with spotty lighting and heavy dust when in a pack. Super dangerous and I’ve always seen high speed wrecks when I’ve raced out there (big sugar and rule of 3). This is where the larger tire volume really shined compared to normal gravel tires. Not as stable as when I raced my full suspension XC bike at Big Sugar last year, but still much better than skinny tires. I’m not sure how much the Lauf fork was contributing to the descending stability, but the overall setup was night and day better than my Checkpoint on the fast/loose descents.

I think the place the fork really shines is on the flatter heavy gravel when pushing hard. There is a bunch of that around bentonville and I was riding people off my wheel whenever we hit the gravel. Some of that I attribute to the aerobars on the smoother sections, but the bike really allowed me to put down power while soaking up all the chatter and bumps. The rougher it got, the quicker I was dropping people (even when not in the aerobars). I think this is primarily a tire volume story, but I also think the fork and seat post are keeping the bike planted and stable when pushing power. The fork didn’t surprise me, it’s basically soaking up bumps the same way a bigger tire would. The big surprise is the rear end of the bike with the Ergon seat post. I’m still getting used to it, but it’s got a crazy amount of compliance when it gets rough. I can’t tell if it’s maybe too compliant, it is a weird sensation but I don’t feel like I’m losing power. Anyway, the bike gets an A++ on pushing hard/fast over rough gravel without beating up the driver. When I’m less beat up, I tend to push more power for a lot longer.

As far as handling, I’m not too picky on that and it really only mattered on the single track at rule of 3. I’m not great navigating singletrack on my gravel bike, but the Seigla certainly inspired more confidence compared to my checkpoint. And more confident = more relaxed = less fatigue. I felt way, way better at the end this year. I think that’s almost all in the bigger tires. The fork might have contributed a little on the singletrack, but for me it’s mostly about the extra tire volume for cornering confidence, the smoother ride isn’t as critical there. A few spots where the bigger tires also helped with climbing traction on loose terrain.

Anyways, I’m super happy I decided on the last minute swap to the Seigla before Unbound. I’m hoping to have this bike on the podium if I can hold up my end of the deal. The North course has a lot of chunky gravel and that’s where the Seigla w/2.2’s really seems to shine. If anyone has any questions on the Seigla, don’t hesitate to ask. I’m a bit of a Lauf fanboy at the moment, TBD how much of that is new bike placebo or if it’s as big of an improvement as I perceived yesterday. Drinking the big tire coolaid by the gallon right now…

19 Likes

Great review and I love that bike. But what I’m also hearing is that I would hate riding gravel around BV. Haha. Thanks for the heads up.

1 Like

Glad you like it. I rode my Lauf last year at Big Sugar and it was like I was riding on roads the whole time. I found the fork lets me not worry at all about the line I choose and it makes washboard a non-issue. I was way less beat up by the end on the Lauf vs Crux.

I feel like I could just reply in all of these threads “just buy a Lauf”. :slight_smile:

5 Likes

Yeah, I’m still debating how much is the bigger tires vs. the fork and seat post, but it’s a completely different (better/faster) riding experience. I’m kicking myself for not making a switch sooner. I saw quite a few Lauf’s at Rule of 3 yesterday, but it is still pretty rare compared to some of the big brands. And they were really ahead of their time launching the Seigla over 3 years ago with clearance for 57’s. I think the fork might be too weird for some buyers, but they offer a rigid fork version as well.

2 Likes

Thanks but I want to like the look of my bike. :wink:

2 Likes

I’ve never been able to wrap my head around prioritizing looks over speed for a race bike, but I certainly respect the opinion and wish more people had it.

3 Likes

I have never goten along with the Seigla suspension fork. I always felt the lack of rebound damping on rocky descents was sketchy. But I do agree it provides a lot of comfort over flat non-technical gravel, so maybe I will switch back to it for Unbound.

I tried the 2.2 Race Kings last week, I just felt they were way too slow everywhere. I also didn’t notice any more confidence or comfort over the Tufo Thundero 48s. Maybe my pressures were just wrong. I went with what Silca recommended for my weight (155lbs 17f/19r). What pressure are you running? I am almost convinced I am just going to run the Thunderos.

1 Like

I’m obviously new to the fork, so time will tell. It’s a far cry from racing gravel on my FS 120/120 XC bike, but it feels like a good middle ground so far. My initial impressions is that the fork suspension dynamics are very similar to a tire (with all the good and bad that comes along). Zero dampening with some bounce in certain situations. The travel dynamic almost feels like I’m running a ~2.6-2.8 front tire. Which makes sense with the ~3cm of extra travel the fork provides. A rigid fork setup running 2.2’s would have ~6-7cm of travel (between tires and fork/frame deflection) and the lauf fork is basically adding another ~50%. I guess the one difference I sense is that the fork suspension is stiffer than a low pressure tire, so it’s not deflecting at the same rate and makes the entire front end feel a bit more progressive (good or bad). I know the fork is working a bit, but I haven’t noticed it ever bottoming out and I suspect it will be rare when running MTB tires (basically a pinch flat situation where the tire and the fork both run out of travel). I also don’t notice any significant bobbing when climbing out of the saddle like I had with my redshift suspension stem, so that’s a nice bonus.

I’m not saying you are wrong, but you might do some head to head segment testing to confirm actual speeds (if you haven’t already done it). I did some head to head a while back between a pathfinder 47 vs. race king 2.2 (front tire only since I couldn’t fit the rear) and the results were pretty clear. RC’s were slower on pavement, but faster even on smooth gravel/dirt. And much faster on loose gravel. The pathfinder isn’t the fastest tire out there, so maybe the thundero would be better/faster for you, but maybe worth some testing. Faster/slower can be tough to determine based on feel.

I’m about 170 lbs and running 20/19 on saturday. I’ve also done some testing at a few PSI higher and they felt better at 20/19. Same pressure I run them for with MTB racing, so it might just be what I’m used to.

1 Like

I was in the same boat back when I had a Salsa Cutthroat. Ran the Race King 2.2 a few years ago because I could easily fit them and they’re fast on BRR. Lots of my gravel rides have plenty of pavement and they felt buzzier and slower than the Thunderos.

Not doubting that folks find the RK’s faster! I didn’t do enough A/B testing to say 100% which was faster so take all that as you will. I will say though people on their 40mm tires thought I was crazy to run 2.2’s on gravel a few years ago and look where we ended up :thinking::thinking::thinking:

Thanks for the feedback. I may just bring both to Kansas and try them out Wednesday and Thursday and then decide before race day. I am pretty sure I will put the Lauf Grit fork back on.

Easy. 90% of my time on the bike isn’t racing. If I had enough money for a dedicated, race only bike, then yea. But I have one gravel bike and the vast majority of the time it’s not spent racing. So I want to like how it rides and looks. Now if the looks are costing me 100W, that’s a different story. But a handful of watts for an ugly bike. Easiest decision ever, I’ll take the good looking bike.

4 Likes

Me, who sold my Tarmac SL8 almost solely because I thought it was ugly, “yea who would do that?”

:pensive_face:

In my defense, I bought a SuperSix Evo after which is a faster bike according to Tour Magazine.

4 Likes

I think people underestimate the free watts of a nice looking bike. Look good, feel good, race good.

10 Likes