Van Rysel RCR bib shorts review: a solid fit and design, but better suited to shorter-length rides
Van Rysel's RCR Bib Shorts undercut most of the big brands on price, but do they match them for comfort?
The Van Rysel RCR Bib Shorts have received mixed reviews, with a solid fit and design, but better suited to shorter rides. The shorts are built around an Elastic Interface pad, featuring a Performance 2.5 HD foam pad for maximum comfort during long-distance rides, which lasts up to five hours. The Rhombus fabric used promises to prevent harmful bacteria growth.
The shorts are made of lighter material compared to modern, highly compressive fabrics, but claim to offer some compression. The main body of the shorts extends up between the shoulder blades, acting as a yoke for the straps, with large perforations in the top section for breathability. The straps are white with reinforced bonded sections at the front, and branding is limited to a small 'Van Rysel' printed on the right thigh and 'RCR' behind the left thigh.
The shorts are available in sizes S to XXL for men and XS to XL for women, in colors such as Pine Green, Cashmere Beige, Concrete Grey, and Smoked Black.
During testing, the fit and design were found to be good, with the right size for a 73kg individual of 186cm. Leg length, front height, strap length, and elasticity were also reported to be satisfactory. However, the cut around the crotch appeared to have excess fabric, causing some discomfort. While the lightweight fabric was suitable for warmer conditions, the Elastic Interface pad may not provide adequate support for full days on the bike.
In terms of value, the RCR shorts are priced at £90/$119, making them a reasonable option in the competitive pricing segment. Nonetheless, some riders might prefer a more supportive pad, especially if they plan to spend more than four hours in the saddle. Van Rysel's Water-repellent Winter Road Cycling Bib Tights, which use the same pad and straps, are also available at a lower price point, making the RCR Bib Shorts a somewhat disappointing option in comparison.
Written by urgent.news from Cycling Weekly's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
