A few weeks ago, on June 12th to be precise, theUCI has released some important new rules that will go into effect next January. These regulations are aimed at safety, but they impact a significant portion of the materials used by professionals. The changes concern handlebars, wheels, gears, tires, frames (here you can reread the whole thing in detail).
We had already mentioned it to you in Monday's editorial What a huge problem this sudden turn of events represents for companies. This time, we're giving voice to some of them: those who first had the courage to speak out.
Decathlon e Van RyselFor example, a huge portion of the handlebars already produced will no longer be approved according to UCI regulations. In theory, they won't even be allowed to be used in a granfondo under the aegis of the Federation and, consequently, the UCI. Let's take the latest bike, too. Factor, for example, seen at the Tour, with a very wide fork and rear triangle: it will be non-standard. And the list of brands involved is long.
The climate was already tense in Lille
The dispute exploded in mid-June. Many companies had organized themselves, also in view of the Tour de France, to present their new products, taking advantage of the visibility guaranteed by the French race.
At one of these presentations we were there too. Remember the wheels Swiss Side? Well, net of the indisputable quality, some of the new wheels, including the Ultimate ones (the highest-end ones), will not be usable from January. We are talking about the 85 and 68 mm models, when the new imposed limit is 65. Daniele Cerafogli, Swiss Side's marketing team made no secret of their disappointment, especially regarding the timing of the UCI's announcement of the changes. In addition to the development being virtually wasted, these models had already gone into production.
The first letters
Just yesterday, Swiss Side has sent a letter to the UCI, signed by CEO Jean Paul Ballard. A long, detailed letter listing the critical issues: financial damage, production already underway, and the impossibility of being ready by early 2026.
According to Swiss Side, A wheel with a higher profile but designed with a specific pattern (depth and width of the channel) is safer in terms of stability and handling than a wheel with a lower profile. The document also includes a graph with wind tunnel data, showing the impact of crosswinds (up to 15°) on the rim.
At the end of the letter, as a demonstration that something is moving, we read: «The UCI, as cycling's governing body, should always be seen as accountable, objective and inclusive. Current actions are not consistent with these values. We therefore call for an urgent reconsideration of the recent amendment to the regulation's implementation.
The voice of companies
We heard Davide Guntri of Deda Elementi, A good representative of the brands that had acted according to a regulation that was then suddenly changed. Thanks to his availability and clarity, he helped us delve deeper into the topic. Previously, Gianluca Cattaneo, head of the Lombardy company, had also expressed his opposition in a post on LinkedIn.
Davide, there are companies that find themselves with a portion of non-compliant products already in production. Is this really the case?
No, not just a few: most of it is already in production. I'm talking about all the products presented at Eurobike, the most important trade fair in Europe and among the top in the world. 70mm wheels, 38cm handlebars. For example, we at Deda had to make a sudden stop And now we're having trouble with all the teams we sponsor. We already had products ready for delivery, like dumbbells. So what do we do now?
Was there usually a comparison between UCI and brands?
Yes but this time there was no comparison. They decided and we found out later.
Who changed the rules of the game? The association SafeR does it have anything to do with it?
I really don't know. But the process shouldn't have changed, especially close to the biggest trade show of the year or when all the teams have the new handlebars installed. Even the bike companies have already started production for 2026. Canyon, for example, has a handlebar that will no longer fit. Even worse Ridley: all their handlebars will be non-standard, from the WorldTour team to the women's and development team. The economic loss is significant. Also because not all suppliers agree to stop production. What do we do, scrap everything?
We're talking about professionals, but could an amateur cyclist still use these components?
Sure, but the amateur follows the trends of the pros. And I can't quantify the loss, but it could be significant for all the companies involved, even those that form groups.
Are you referring to Sram's 10-tooth sprocket that would push the set with many of its chainrings beyond the metric development limit?
Exact. Their cassettes are a monoblock, you can't just remove a gear.
To be mischievous, Shimano and UCI are very close…
It seems that Shimano told the UCI to be careful, that certain rules would have also created difficulties for other group builders. They took a very correct position.
The point is to understand whether this is real security or just a facade…
Exactly. We went to the extreme. That's right: you can't make a two-meter-tall guy run with a 36-centimeter handlebar. But if we want to talk about real safety, we need to move beyond the materials issue. We want to talk about barriers, unsafe curves, traffic islands... And then you shut down businesses? And you forcefully direct the market?
Teams also say they received a UCI questionnaire a few days before the new rules…
I imagine! A few evenings ago I was on the track in Crema, as president of the provincial FCI. Talking with Ivan Quaranta he told me that when three years ago they developed with Pinarello Most handlebars, their engineer suggested working on a 35, not 33-centimeter handlebar. «You'll see that 33 won't be good anymore", he told him.
Who benefits from this situation?
Good question. When our director sent me the excerpt of the regulations, my blood ran cold. I asked myself, "What happened? Did I misread the rules?" It makes you think I've missed something. Read and reread. Then you see the reality of the facts. It's difficult to navigate the rules. Time trial times, for example, are complex to interpret even for us. And speaking of time trials and UCI precision, shall we talk about the gauges they use to measure whether a bike is compliant?
Let's talk about…
Al Round d'Italy, some bikes from a team with which we have a good relationship even if they are not our customers, They were good for the time trial in Albania, but not for the one in Pisa. Same bikes, identical. And then let's talk about safety: do we want to discuss the number of cars in tow? There are so many regulations that need to be settled before we can even begin working on the materials. Why are there three categories (1, 2, 3) for athlete height and bike size in time trials, but not on the road? It would be enough to introduce the same system and you would solve it.
Of course, without banning certain products. And this would automatically fix the women's sector, which, absurdly, in some cases sees handlebars become excessively large...
I repeat: safety comes first. It's fine to make rules that push in that direction. But let's tackle it step by step. Let's find something that protects under the helmet, so to speak. And Let's do it with the right timing and through dialogue.
Will there be a reaction from the companies? The UCI will have to explain itself, right?
I know that at Eurobike Adam hansen (CPA president, ed.) and a UCI inspector met with the manufacturers. I hope a waiver will be granted for 2026, because time is too short and many won't be able to redo everything in time.
