Next, I published tests for banded Club Events on a climb: Alpe du Zwift, to be precise. These tests showed that banded Club Events are giving riders unrealistically fast speeds.

All that remains is to test climbing in banded Meetups and compare those results to climbing banded Club Events. Let’s get to it!

Testing Banded Alpe Meetups

The core questions I want to answer are: Do rubberbanded Meetup speeds make sense, or are they too slow, too fast, or some strange mix of both? And how do they compare to banded Club Events?

The riders in these tests were 75kg in weight, 183cm tall, and rode Zwift Carbon bikes with 32mm carbon wheels. I timed the riders on the Alpe du Zwift climb segment since it’s steep and long enough to be a good representation of climb performance.

Test 1: A Pair of Bots

This first round of tests used just two riders in a Meetup with “Keep Everyone Together” mode enabled. Here are each rider’s power outputs, segment times, and average speeds.

Observations

When both riders held the same power the times are similar to banded Club Event times, although the Meetup test results are always a bit slower.

But the big thing that stands out here is that these times are significantly slower than the banded Club Event tests when the riders have differing power numbers. The times you see above are roughly in line with what we see from ZwiftPower’s historical data on the Alpe du Zwift segment, if we base the time on the stronger rider’s power.

So it appears that banded Meetups are delivering fairly accurate speeds, at least for the more powerful rider in the group. (The weaker rider in, say, a 300W and 75W pairing will, of course, have an unrealistically high speed.)

Getting a bit pickier, it’s odd that our test riders turned in the same time whether the pair was doing 300W and 225W, or they were doing 300W and 75W. Logically, you would expect things to be at least a bit slower when the group’s average power drops considerably.

Test 2: Solo Rider

Next, I wanted to test how a solo rider in a rubberbanded Meetup performs compared to the paired riders above. So I created a Meetup with “Keep Everyone Together” enabled, but only had one rider join. Here are the results:

Compare those numbers above to free ride times with a solo rider (which should, in theory, be the same):

Observations

First, notice that when there is just one rider in the rubberbanded event, their speeds closely match the tests when we had one stronger rider banded to a weaker one. This is also what we saw with the flat tests for banded Meetups. They don’t perfectly match a free riding solo rider, but they’re close, and much closer than our tests with a solo rider in a banded Club Event.

Secondly, our solo banded Meetup rider was significantly faster than the solo banded Club Ride rider. This is just further evidence that the algorithm for banded Club Rides needs fixing.

Concluding Thoughts

These test results clearly show that “Keep Everyone Together” mode in Meetups behaves very differently from “Keep Everyone Together” mode in Clubs. Specifically, banded Meetups are markedly slower on climbs than banded Club events.

This is the opposite of what we observed in our flat tests of banded Club Events and Meetups. In those tests, banded Meetups were markedly faster than banded Club events.

But here’s the good news: on both flats and climbs, banded Meetups appear, at least from my limited 2-rider tests, to perform fairly realistically, in a way that all participants can enjoy. So Zwift may have a simple solution available that will greatly improve the current banded riding experience: instead of running two different banding algorithms (one for Club events, one for Meetups) just run one, and make it the one currently in use for Meetups!

But I’ll add one more recommendation to that: mark all banded activities as “gamified” when uploading to Strava, so segment times don’t go on leaderboards or count for personal PRs. This fixes the issue of lower-power riders setting PRs in banded events that they can never break when riding in a non-banded environment. Going even further, banded event times should also be hidden from in-game leaderboards, and shouldn’t be saved for segments or HoloReplays.

There Is Good News!

Zwift HQ has noticed these speed tests… and they’re working to improve the banding algorithm! Just this week I chatted with a Zwift software engineer about it, and it sounds like a solution may be released very soon. I may even get to test it before it’s released. Ride on!

Questions or Comments?

Share below!

“Rubberbanding” makes it easy to keep a group of cyclists together, and that’s a good thing, because any ride leader will tell you that keeping cyclists together without some artificial help can feel like herding cats!

Testing the Rubberbands

So how does Zwift’s “Keep Everyone Together” logic work? I’m not entirely sure, and Zwift isn’t revealing the secret sauce. So I’ve been running tests to find out what speeds rubberbanded riders reach at different power levels, in different event setups. For science!

The core question I want to answer is: Do rubberbanded speeds make sense? Are they too slow, too fast, or some strange mix of both?

My first tests were on flat ground in a banded Club Event. Then I did more flat tests, but this time using a banded Meetup. Today, we’re digging into our first banded climb tests, using a banded Club Event.

The riders in these tests were 75kg in weight, 183cm tall, and rode Zwift Carbon bikes with 32mm carbon wheels. I timed the riders on the Alpe du Zwift climb segment since it’s steep and long enough to be a good representation of climb performance.

Test 1: A Pair of Bots

This first round of tests used just two riders in a Club event with “Keep Everyone Together” mode enabled. Here are each rider’s power outputs, segment times, and average speeds.

Observations

The first thing that stands out here is how illogical the results are. Why would two banded riders holding 300W be 7 minutes slower than one rider holding 300W banded to a rider holding 75W?

This pattern repeats itself, too. When two riders match wattage, they turn in a much slower time than when the wattages are unmatched, even though the stronger rider’s wattage is the same in both tests.

That’s not to say the matched wattage times are particularly slow, though. They just seem slow because the unmatched wattage test times are way too fast.

For example: a solo rider holding 300W climbs the Alpe in 49:28. But a banded group with one rider holding 300W and the other holding 75W climbs the Alpe in 40:11!

The other odd thing is how the pair times don’t change as the weaker rider’s power decreases. (This same phenomenon was observed in our flat tests.) That is, when Rider 1 is holding 300W and Rider 2 is holding 225W, they’re traveling at the same speed as when Rider 1 holds 300W and Rider 2 holds 75W. That’s strange. Shouldn’t groups travel significantly faster if the group’s average power increases significantly?

Test 2: Solo Rider

Next, I wanted to test how a solo rider in a rubberbanded Club event performs compared to the paired riders above. So I created an event with “Keep Together” enabled, but only had one rider join. Here are the results:

Compare those numbers above to free ride times with a solo rider (which should, in theory, be the same):

Observations

First, notice that when there is just one rider in the rubberbanded event, their speeds are much slower than they would be when free riding. That’s goofy. The speed difference between a solo rider in a banded event vs free riding isn’t as dramatic on the Alpe as it was in our flat tests, but there is still a significant difference.

Also, notice how the solo tests all came in significantly slower than the paired rider tests, even though logically that wouldn’t happen.

Concluding Thoughts

Simply put, Keep Together mode is broken up Alpe du Zwift. Zwift supposedly slowed banded group speeds on climbs in their version 1.52 update, but based on the results above, speeds are still too high!

I’d love to see rubberbanding improved so it’s a more realistic experience, but we also think Zwift should consider flagging all banded rides as “Gamified” when uploading to Strava, so we don’t set new segment PRs thanks to unrealistically high speeds in banded rides. Holoreplay and other in-game PR data also should not be saved for banded events, and times should not show on leaderboards outside of the event itself.

Coming Up Next

Soon, I’ll perform similar tests using banded Meetups, to see if/how Meetup banding behaves differently from Club Event banding. Stay tuned!

Questions or Comments?

Share below!

Unfortunately, the Tri Spoke was misconfigured when it first launched, meaning it turned in super-slow times more on par with gravel bikes than road bikes (see original speed test results). Zwift fixed this issue quickly, though, rolling out the fix in the version 1.61 update that was released this week.

Once we downloaded the update, we went to work running fresh tests. Zwift has indeed reconfigured the wheels, but the star ratings didn’t change: they are still rated 3 stars for aero and 1 for weight. This illustrates how non-granular Zwift’s star ratings actually are. They simply aren’t precise enough to communicate actual in-game performance in a useful way for picky racers, so we ran the wheels through our battery of speed tests.

Here’s everything you need to know about the updated Tri Spoke /Disc Wheel’s performance in Zwift.

Aero (Flat/Rolling) Performance

Tri spoke + disc wheels are commonly seen on TT setups because they’re fast. So we expected Zwift’s new Tri Spoke to be pretty zippy on the flats.

The updated wheels aren’t anything to write home about, though. Despite looking quite aero, especially with that rear disc, the wheels turn in a test time of 50:53.5 on our test course, which is two laps of Tempus Fugit totaling 34.6km.

This is almost 3 minutes faster than the old misconfigured wheels (so that’s a big improvement), but also 19.5s slower than the 808/Disc wheelset, which is the slower of the disc wheelsets. The aero performance of the updated Tri Spoke is now within 1 seconds of the ENVE SES 6.7, Zipp 404, and Zipp 353 NSW wheels… all wheels that are better all-arounders than aero performers.

Climb Performance

Given the Tri Spoke’s 1-star weight rating and mid-tier aero performance, we didn’t expect great things on our Alpe test. We got what we expected.

The Tri Spoke // Disc Wheel turns in an Alpe climb time of 49:47, which is almost 2 minutes faster than the misconfigured Tri Spoke, but still quite slow. These are still the slowest climbing wheels in game, 8s slower up the Alpe than the next slowest wheelset (Zipp 808/Disc combo) and 33s slower than the best climbing wheels (the Lightweight Meilenstein and Roval Alpinist CLX.)

Note: all test results above are from a 75kg, 183cm rider holding 300W steady using the Zwift Aero frame.

Conclusions

The original Tri Spoke wheels were so slow that riders could easily sense their poor performance in races or RoboPacer riders. The updated wheels are much faster, so riders using them probably won’t notice a performance hit compared to other rigs.

That said, there is indeed a performance hit! The aero performance of these wheels puts them mid-pack, and they’re the Lanterne Rouge in climb performance.

These wheels are now useable for relaxed rides, but we can’t recommend them for racing.

Questions or Comments?

Share below!

UPDATE: Zwift released a game update which significantly increased the performance of these wheels. The numbers below are not accurate for Zwift version 1.61+.

Read all the details >

The new Zwift Big Spin series has just kicked off, and many riders are joining the events in hopes of spinning and winning limited-time novelty unlocks. One of the most popular is the “Zwift Tri Spoke // Disc Wheel”. It’s an eye-catching wheelset and the first tri spoke in game, so many Zwifters are riding extra Big Spin events just for these wheels!

The new wheelset is rated 3 stars for aero and 1 for weight. But Zwift’s star ratings aren’t precise enough to communicate actual in-game performance in a useful way, so we ran the wheels through our battery of speed tests.

Here’s everything you need to know about the performance of the new Tri Spoke // Disc Wheel in Zwift.

Aero (Flat/Rolling) Performance

Tri spoke + disc wheels are commonly seen on TT setups because they’re fast. So we expected Zwift’s new Tri Spoke to be pretty zippy on the flats.

But it’s not. Far from it, in fact.

The wheels turn in a test time of 53:43 on our test course, which is two laps of Tempus Fugit totaling 34.6km. That makes them over 2 minutes slower than the former slowest wheels in game (the “Zwift Classic”). and 3 minutes and 18 seconds slower than the fastest wheels in game (the DT Swiss ARC 62 Dicut Disc).

Or, to put it another way: the Zwift Aero frame with these wheels turns in almost the same time on our flat test as a gravel bike and wheels.

Climb Performance

Given the Tri Spoke’s 1-star weight rating and terrible flat performance, we didn’t expect great things on our Alpe test. We got what we expected.

The Tri Spoke // Disc Wheel turns in an Alpe climb time of 51:40.5, which is 2 minutes and 12.5 seconds slower than our baseline (the Zwift 32mm Carbon wheels) and 2:26.5 slower than the best climbing wheels (the Lightweight Meilenstein and Roval Alpinist CLX.)

Note: all test results above are from a 75kg, 183cm rider holding 300W steady using the Zwift Aero frame.

Conclusions

We didn’t expect the Tri Spoke to be the fastest wheelset in game (Zwift-branded garage items are never top performers), but given how aero tri spoke + disc combos are IRL, we thought it would hold at least its own against other wheelsets. But that’s not at all the case.

Guessing that the dismal performance of these wheels was due to a configuration error on Zwift’s side, we asked Zwift if that was the case. And they said yes! The rear wheel has the wrong Crr setting, and this will be updated in the next Zwift update (which should release next week, March 19th, if they stick to their current schedule).

Until then, we’ll be duly impressed by anyone who can win a race on these wheels. Comment below if you’re brave enough to try!

Questions or Comments?

Share below!

Chief among the Big Spin unlocks, though, is the “Zwift Atomic Cruiser” – a tribute to “futuristic” mid-century bikes like the Spacelander. To be clear: there’s no way to purchase this bike. The only way to unlock it is to finish a Zwift Big Spin event and have the prize spinner land on the bike space, which is the lowest probability prize on the spinner.

Here’s how it is described in Zwift’s Drop Shop:

“Look up ‘joyride’ in the dictionary, and you’ll find a picture of The Atomic Cruiser – the first Grand Prize of The Big Spin. Stylish at any speed, this blast from the past is a classic speedster.”

This frame is rated 2 stars for aero and 2 for weight. But Zwift’s star ratings aren’t precise enough to communicate actual performance in game in a useful way, so we ran the Atomic Cruiser through our battery of speed tests.

Here’s everything you need to know about the performance of the new Zwift Atomic Cruiser frame in Zwift.

Aero (Flat/Rolling) Performance

The Atomic Cruiser may look like a super-aero rocketship, but unfortunately… it’s not.

Its test time of 51:43 means it is slower than every other road frame in game, apart from the mighty Buffalo Fahrrad. It is 21 seconds slower than our “baseline” Zwift Aero frame and 29 seconds slower than the fastest frames in game on our test course, which is two laps of Tempus Fugit, totaling 34.6km.

Climb Performance

Clearly, Zwift’s Atomic Cruiser is not a lightweight frame. We think Zwift was pretty generous in making the frame as light as they did, considering it looks like it should weigh more than any other frame in game!

The Atomic Cruiser turns in an Alpe climb time of 50:07, which is 39 seconds slower than our Zwift Aero baseline and 77 seconds slower than the best climbing road frame in game – the Specialized Aethos. Once again, it is slower than every other road frame in game, other than the Buffalo Fahrrad.

Note: all test results above are from a 75kg, 183cm rider holding 300W steady using Zwift’s stock 32mm carbon wheelset.

Conclusions

It’s probably best to think of Zwift’s Atomic Cruiser in game like you’d think of having this same bike IRL. It’s a novelty frame that will grab eyes and stir up nostalgia, but you don’t want to ride it if you’re looking for speedy performance.

So pull it out of your garage on recovery days, enjoy a cruise, and don’t forget to smile.

Questions or Comments?

Share below!

We’ve also selected a training update video, a long-term review of the KICKR Bike Shift, and a Zwift race commentary/analysis video.

Got a Great Zwift Video?

Share the link below and we may feature it in an upcoming post!

That seemed goofy to me… why would Zwift have two different Keep Together algorithms? I knew I had to run some tests to see if the rumors were true.

In addition to seeing if rubberbanding behaves differently in Meetups than in Club events, these tests were also done to answer the question do rubberbanded speeds in Meetups make sense? Or are they too slow, too fast, or some strange mix of both?

The riders in these tests were 75kg in weight, 183cm tall, and rode Zwift Carbon bikes with 32mm carbon wheels. I timed the riders on the Fuego Flats Reverse segment since it’s flat and long enough to get a stable speed reading.

Test 1: A Pair of Bots

This first round of tests used just two riders in a Meetup event with “Keep Everyone Together” mode enabled. Here are each rider’s power outputs, segment times, and average speeds.

Observations

The first thing that stands out here is how much faster the riders moved compared to a banded Club event. Here’s a comparison table:

Looking at these comparisons, it’s clear that the riders in the banded Club events were moving much too slowly, while the banded Meetup is pretty close to accurate. (Two riders holding 300W in a banded Meetup are just slightly faster than a standard event with 4 riders holding 300W.)

So something is clearly different with Zwift’s “Keep Everyone Together” algorithm for Meetups vs Club Events. Interestingly, though, both types of events share the same odd behavior when it comes to having a “strong” rider pulling a “weaker” rider. The results above, just like the Club event results, show that times don’t change as the weaker rider’s power decreases.

That is, when Rider 1 is holding 300W and Rider 2 is holding 225W, they’re traveling at the same speed as when Rider 1 holds 300W and Rider 2 holds 75W. That’s strange. Shouldn’t groups travel significantly faster if the group’s average power increases significantly?

Test 2: Solo Rider

Next, I wanted to test if a solo rider in a rubberbanded Meetup still traveled as slowly as the paired riders above. So I created a Meetup with “Keep Everyone Together” enabled, but only had one rider join. Here are the results:

Observations

First, notice that the times for the solo riders matched the times when we paired up two riders, but one was doing less power than the other (see Test 1 above). That’s certainly not a coincidence. And it actually matches what would happen outside! That is, you would travel at the same speed riding alone at 300W as you would if you held 300W but had a weaker rider sitting on your wheel.

Secondly, notice that the solo rider times in this test are slower than solo rider times when in free ride mode. They’re not nearly as far off as my solo rider tests in banded Club events, but they’re still off.

The 1000W test is also interesting since it’s sort of a “max speed” test that shows if banded Meetups have high speeds impacted. In rubberbanded Meetup mode the rider reached 60kph, while in free ride mode the same rider holding 1000W reaches around 62kph. Again, much closer than the banded Club ride (where the 1000W rider could only hit 47kph). But still not quite the same speed as a free ride.

Concluding Thoughts

These test results clearly show that “Keep Everyone Together” mode in Meetups behaves very differently from “Keep Everyone Together” mode in Clubs. Specifically, banded Meetups are markedly faster than banded Club events.

And that’s weird, right? I can’t think of any reason why Zwift would want to run two different versions of “Keep Everyone Together.”

Do banded Meetup speeds make sense? Or do they feel too fast, or too slow? My hunch is they may feel pretty accurate for medium and high-strength riders, since pack speeds in these limited tests are mostly aligned with the power being done by the stronger rider. For that reason, speeds may feel a bit fast for low-powered riders, since they’re effectively being pulled along at the strong rider’s speed, even if they’re putting out next to zero power.

Nobody will be breaking land speed records with the current algorithm like they did with the buggy one in years past, but for sure a rider who can only hold 100W is going to set a lot of Strava PRs if they jump into a banded Meetup with riders who can hold 300W!

Because of this, perhaps Zwift should consider tagging banded activities as “gamified” when posting to Strava, so the activities don’t show up on leaderboards or count for PRs. What do you think?

Coming Up Next

I’ll be testing speeds in a group workout to see if the algorithm that keeps riders together in these events matches up with either the Meetup or Clubs “Keep Everyone Together” algorithm. For science!

Also, we’re working on banded Meetup and Club event tests on Alpe du Zwift, to see how rubberbanding behaves on long climbs. Stay tuned!

Questions or Comments?

Share below!

“Rubberbanding” makes it easy to keep a group of cyclists together, and that’s a good thing, because any ride leader will tell you that keeping cyclists together without some artificial help can feel like herding cats!

A Short History of Rubberbanding

Rubberbanding or “Keep Everyone Together” mode has a colorful history on Zwift. It was first introduced when group workouts arrived in 2017, then quickly throttled to lower speeds after lower-power riders complained they were setting segment PRs in workouts.

For a couple of years, rubberbanding was only available in group workouts, and group workout packs moved notoriously slow. But then “Keep Everyone Together” was added as an option for Meetups in October 2019… and all hell broke loose.

The problem was that rubberbanded Meetups had a major speed bug. Groups would speed up over 45kph for no good reason, topping Strava leaderboards (see Box Hill as one example). And this went on for much too long (three years or more).

While rubberbanded Meetups were zipping around at silly speeds, Zwift rolled out Clubs, and eventually launched Keep Together Mode for Clubs in November 2023, along with updated “Keep Everyone Together” logic that replaced the speed-bugged logic used for Meetups.

Testing the Rubberbands

So how does Zwift’s “Keep Everyone Together” logic work? I’m not entirely sure, and Zwift isn’t revealing the secret sauce. So I decided to run some tests using rubberbanded Club events to find out what speeds rubberbanded riders reach at different power levels. For science!

The question I wanted to answer was: do rubberbanded speeds make sense? Or are they too slow, too fast, or some strange mix of both?

The riders in these tests were 75kg in weight, 183cm tall, and rode Zwift Carbon bikes with 32mm carbon wheels. I timed the riders on the Fuego Flats Reverse segment since it’s flat and long enough to get a stable speed reading.

Test 1: A Pair of Bots

This first round of tests used just two riders in a Club event with “Keep Everyone Together” mode enabled. Here are each rider’s power outputs, segment times, and average speeds.

Observations

The first thing that stands out here is how slow the times are, particularly when the riders have matched power numbers. I know from other tests that solo free riders complete the segment at these approximate speeds:

• 300W: 40.23 kph
• 225W: 35.95 kph
• 150W: 30.81 kph

Why are rubberbanded riders moving so slowly, when they’re both holding the same power? Clearly, something in Zwift’s Keep Together logic is artificially slowing the riders.

The other odd thing is how the pair times don’t change as the weaker rider’s power decreases. That is, when Rider 1 is holding 300W and Rider 2 is holding 225W, they’re traveling at the same speed as when Rider 1 holds 300W and Rider 2 holds 75W. That’s strange. Shouldn’t groups travel significantly faster if the group’s average power increases significantly?

Test 2: Solo Rider

Next, I wanted to test if a solo rider in a rubberbanded Club event still traveled as slowly as the paired riders above. So I created an event with “Keep Together” enabled, but only had one rider join. Here are the results:

Observations

First, notice that when there was just one rider in the rubberbanded event, their speeds were still much slower than they would be when free riding. That’s goofy.

Also, notice how the 300W, 225W, and 150W solo tests all came in a bit slower than the paired rider tests, even when the slower paired rider was doing very low power. For example, a solo rider at 300W traveled at 30.58kph, while two riders holding 300W and 75W traveled at 31.73kph.

Shouldn’t the pair with a very slow second rider move slower, as the rider holding just 75W slows down the overall group?

The 1000W test is also interesting, since it’s sort of a “max speed” test that shows just how slow banded rides may be. In rubberbanded mode the rider only reached around 47kph, while in free ride mode the same rider holding 1000W reaches around 62kph. Or another way of looking at it: ~460W in free ride mode will get you the same speed as ~1000W in “Keep Everyone Together” mode. Sorry, sprinters.

Other Rubberbanding Discoveries

In the course of these tests, I also asked and answered a few Keep Together questions I’ve seen:

• When does the elastic snap? When a rider drops below 10W, they’ll drop from the group.
• Can you rejoin the banded group? Yup. In my tests with two riders, if a rider dropped back about 30 meters and then increased their power to 10W, they would rejoin the group. If they dropped back 40 meters before increasing power, they would not rejoin. (This “rejoin window” may differ based on group size, like it does for RoboPacers.)
• If a rider is lapped, can they rejoin the group even though they’re “behind?” Yes. Same behavior as noted above.

I also noticed a few things that surprised me:

• Coned riders disappear: one of my bots got the “cone of shame” for holding high power for too long. When that happened, the bot disappeared from the group ride. Well, sort of. It was more like a shadow ban: the shamed bot could still see the other rider, but the other rider didn’t see the shamed bot anymore. This is actually pretty cool, although perhaps Zwift should notify the coned rider that they’ve been hidden. I’m guessing this is how Zwift now treats coned riders in all events.
• Pairing screen doesn’t stop you: if you’re pedaling along in a Keep Together ride and enter the pairing screen, your avatar doesn’t slow. This is counter to pairing screen behavior everywhere else in game, where entering the screen is like hitting the brakes!
• Except when it does: interestingly, if both riders in the Keep Together ride enter the pairing screen, then they both stop.

Concluding Thoughts

Keep Together mode has always been popular in Zwift because riders want to be together, and the magic of Zwift allows riders even with very different abilities to go hard but stay together. That’s a big deal! So even when it was broken and zipping people around at silly speeds, people kept coming back because cycling is a social sport, cyclists are social people, and Zwift is a social platform.

Yes, rubberbanding is popular. And yes, Zwift fixed the algorithm so land speed records aren’t broken anymore in banded Meetups. But the results above show that Keep Together mode still has plenty of room for improvement. Specifically, banded Club rides are moving too slowly, and speeds aren’t fluctuating realistically.

I’ll admit these tests are very limited in scope, and it’s possible that the banded experience is better in larger groups. But I also don’t think that’s the case, as banded rides I’ve taken part in have felt much too slow, and other Zwifters have said the same. Plus, the experience needs to be good in groups of just two riders, because it’s often just pairs of Zwifters who want to ride together!

Coming Up Next

Soon I’ll perform similar tests on Alpe du Zwift, to see how rubberbanding behaves on long climbs. I’ll also be testing rubberbanded Meetups to see if they behave differently than Club events. Stay tuned!

Questions or Comments?

Share below!

(Keep in mind this list applies only to big climbs. The list below is essentially a simplified, climbing-race-focused version of our complete Zwift Shopping Guide. If your race is flat or only has short, rolling climbs you’ll probably want to go with a more aero setup.)

Want to keep it simple? Just purchase each recommended frame or wheelset as soon as you level up. Don’t have enough Drops? Keep riding – you’ll get them soon enough! (And you might want to ride near a RoboPacer so your Drops add up more quickly!)

Fastest Climbing Frames

* the Scott Addict RC (660,200 Drops at level 17) turns in the same climb performance as the Canyon Ultimate CFR, but is much faster on the flats. So while the Ultimate CFR is the best buy on paper, the Addict RC is a better bike all around.

Fastest Climbing Wheelsets

* while the CADEX 36 wheels climb a bit faster than the FFWD RYOT55, they are much slower on flat ground, so we don’t recommend purchasing them for performance reasons.

Total time savings of fastest frame and wheelset over stock Zwift setup (Zwift Steele frame and Zwift classic wheels): 65.5+22=87.5 seconds

Times above based on our climb speed tests, done with a solo 75kg rider at 300 watts up Alpe du Zwift. Our test rider typically completes the route in ~49 minutes.

What About the Lightweight Meilensteins?

The Lightweight Meilenstein wheels are some of the lightest in game, making them the fastest climbers along with the Specialized Roval Alpinist CLX. Both wheelsets shave 14 seconds off the stock wheels on an Alpe climb.

But the only way to get them is via the prize spinner atop the Alpe… so you’d better get climbing!

What About the Tron Bike?

The Zwift Concept Z1 (Tron) bike is 46.5 seconds faster than the stock Zwift Steel+Classic wheels setup in our Alpe climb tests. The fastest setups available (Specialized Aethos with Lightweight Meilenstein or Roval Alpinist CLX wheels) turn in a time 24 seconds faster than the Tron bike over our ~49-minute test.

So the Tron bike is not the way to go in a pure climbing race. But very few Zwift events are pure climbing races! The Tron bike has perhaps the best combination of aero + light weight in game, making it a good choice for routes with short climbs.

We didn’t include the Tron in the chart above since you can’t separate the Tron’s frame from its wheels. But it’s certainly a bike worth unlocking. Here’s how to do that >

Improvement by Level

Even more so than our list of most aero frames and wheels by level, the biggest performance gains for climbing come very early in a Zwifter’s level progression. 70% of total gains are attainable by just level 6!

Your Thoughts

Hopefully this helps you select a bike for your next race, no matter your Zwift level. Got questions or comments? Post below!

Learn how Zwift’s levels, XP, and unlocks work >
Learn how Drops are calculated >

Here’s a complete list of frames and wheels unlocked at each level, with the most useful unlocks marked in bold and the key purchases marked with a MUST BUY. We’ve even added notes so you know what makes those unlocks special!

Of course, you may want to purchase a particular frame or wheelset just because it looks cool or matches what you ride outdoors. Nothing wrong with that! Our recommendations, though, are based entirely on speed test performance.

Level 1

• Zwift Steel frame (Free)

Level 2

• Zwift Gravel frame (50,000 Drops)

Level 3

• Zwift Carbon frame (55,000)
• Zwift 32mm Carbon wheels (32,000)

Level 4

• Zwift TT frame (60,000): the first TT frame you can buy, but if you can wait for and afford the BMT Timemachine01 it’s much faster.
• Shimano C50 wheels (34,600 Drops): an affordable choice for your first set of racing wheels, although much faster hoops are available at higher levels.
• Shimano C40 wheels (35,900 Drops)

Level 5

• Parlee ESX frame (153,200 Drops): a nice upgrade for racing, or hold on until level 9 and pick up the faster Zwift Aero.
• Reserve 25 GR gravel wheels (83,900 Drops)

Level 6

• Mavic Cosmic Ultimate UST wheels (36,400 Drops): the fastest wheels available at this level.
• Chapter2 Tere frame (199,400 Drops)
• Cannondale CAAD12 frame (106,300 Drops)

Level 7

• Mavic Cosmic CXR60c wheels (39,800 Drops): the fastest wheels available at this level.
• BMC Timemachine01 frame (400,000 Drops): the fastest TT frame available at this level.
• Van Rysel EDR CF frame (144,100 Drops)

Level 8

• Canyon Inflite frame (200,000 Drops)
• Moots Vamoots frame (275,000 Drops)

Level 9

• Zwift Aero frame (250,000 Drops): The fastest frame available at this level.
• Specialized Allez frame (122,700 Drops)
• Zwift 50mm Carbon wheels (43,700 Drops)

Level 10

• Bridgestone Anchor RS9s frame (200,000 Drops): listed in fastest climbing frames, the unfortunately-named Anchord is the fastest climber available at this level.
• Shimano C60 wheels (41,100 Drops): the fastest wheels available at this level.
• Cube Aerium frame (251,700 Drops)

Level 11

• Canyon Lux frame (275,000 Drops)
• Bontrager Aeolus5 wheels (67,700 Drops)

Level 12

• Campagnolo Bora Ultra 50 wheels (150,000 Drops): these are the best climbing wheels available at this level.
• Cannondale Synapse frame (270,100 Drops)
• Canyon Ultimate frame (322,500 Drops)
• Canyon Ultimate CFR frame (350,700 Drops)

Level 13

• Mavic Comete Pro Carbon SL UST wheels (45,400 Drops): the fastest wheels available at this level.
• Chapter2 Rere frame (326,400 Drops)
• Quintana Roo V-PR frame (297,400 Drops)

Level 14

• Specialized Allez Sprint frame (387,000 Drops): Just like IRL, this frame is a good buy in terms of price/performance. It’s the fastest frame available at this level, but a faster one is just a couple of levels away!
• Specialized Diverge frame (300,000 Drops)
• CADEX AR 35 gravel wheels (154,500 Drops)

Level 15

• Roval Rapide CLX wheels (200,000): the fastest wheels available at this level.
• Cervelo S3D frame (415,300 Drops)
• Ridley Helium frame (272,500 Drops)

Level 16

• MUST BUY! Felt IA 2.0 frame (750,000 Drops): listed in fastest tt frames and fastest tt climbing frames. The fastest TT frame available at this level. Buy this or the level 18 Scott Plasma RC Ultimate (they perform identically) if you’re racing TT.
• Felt IA frame (515,100 Drops): listed in fastest tt frames.
• Felt FR frame (562,700 Drops)
• Roval CLX64 wheels (150,000 Drops)

Level 17

• MUST BUY! Scott Addict RC frame (660,200 Drops): listed in fastest climbing frames. The best all-arounder available in the Drop Shop, and the second-best climber in game!
• CADEX 42 wheels (119,500 Drops)
• HED Vanquish RC6 Pro wheels (120,000 Drops)
• Liv Devote Advanced Pro frame (450,000 Drops)

Level 18

• FFWD RYOT55 wheels (136,100 Drops): listed in fastest climbing wheels, these are the best climbers available at this level.
• Specialized Roubaix frame (333,500 Drops)
• Specialized Roubaix frame S-Works (405,200 Drops)
• Specialized Ruby frame (333,500 Drops)
• Specialized Ruby S-Works frame (399,300 Drops)
• BMC Roadmachine frame (344,100 Drops)

Level 19

• Scott Plasma RC Ultimate (600,000 Drops): listed in fastest tt climbing frames and fastest tt frames. This is tied with the Felt IA 2.0 as the best climbing TT frame in game, so get one of them if you’re doing uphill TTs!
• Zipp 404 wheels (115,600 Drops): The fastest wheels available at this level.
• Scott Plasma frame (528,600 Drops): listed in fastest tt climbing frames
• Factor One frame (600,000 Drops)

Level 20

• Cannondale System Six frame (725,100 Drops)
• Scott Spark RC frame (350,000 Drops)
• Scott Spark RC World Cup frame (750,000 Drops)
• Zipp 202 wheels (135,200 Drops)

Level 21

• Giant SLR 0 wheels (165,100 Drops): listed in fastest climbing wheels.
• Ribble Endurance frame (505,500 Drops)

Level 22

• Focus Izalco Max 2020 frame (712,900 Drops)
• Trek Speed Concept SLR 9 frame (670,500 Drops)
• ENVE SES 6.7 wheels (150,000 Drops)

Level 23

• MUST BUY! Felt AR frame (714,100 Drops): listed in fastest frames. The fastest frame available at this level, and indeed, the Felt AR is one of four frames all tied for “fastest” in Zwift.
• Giant Revolt Advanced Pro frame (475,000 Drops)
• Allied Able frame (550,000 Drops)
• ENVE G23 gravel wheels (241,800 Drops)

Level 24

• Zipp 353 NSW wheels (168,800 Drops): listed in fastest climbing wheels.
• Liv Langma Advanced SL frame (511,300 Drops)
• Liv Langma Advanced SL Disc frame (613,200 Drops)
• Cube Litening frame (536,500 Drops)
• Cube Litening C:68X frame (604,200 Drops)

Level 25

• MUST BUY! Zipp 808 wheels (200,000 Drops): listed in fastest wheels these are the most aero wheels you can buy until level 31, so you’d better pick up a set!
• Ventum One frame (440,800 Drops): listed in fastest tt frames.
• Trek Emonda SL frame (560,300 Drops)

Level 26

• ENVE SES 2.2 wheels (174,300 Drops)
• Scott Foil frame (676,900 Drops)
• Canyon Grail frame (750,000 Drops)

Level 27

• ENVE SES 3.4 wheels (200,000 Drops): listed in fastest climbing wheels.
• Canyon Aeroad 2021 frame (532,500 Drops)
• Giant TCR Advanced SL frame (566,100 Drops)
• Giant TCR Advanced TCR Advanced BikeExchange-Jayco Team frame (543,100 Drops)

Level 28

• Cervelo R5 frame (633,600 Drops)
• Pinarello Bolide frame (618,400 Drops)
• Pinarello Bolide TT frame (627,000 Drops)
• ENVE SES 8.9 wheels (250,000 Drops): listed in fastest wheels.

Level 29

• Cannondale EVO frame (714,500 Drops): listed in fastest climbing frames.
• Cannondale SuperSix EVO frame (768,200 Drops): listed in fastest climbing frames.
• Specialized Epic S-Works frame (950,000 Drops)
• CADEX 36 wheels (216,900 Drops)

Level 30

• MUST BUY! Specialized Aethos frame (966,300 Drops): listed in fastest climbing frames, it’s the best climber on Zwift by a big margin. The Aethos belongs in your garage if you want to climb as quickly as possible.
• Zipp 454 wheels (204,300 Drops): listed in climbing wheels. A strong set of all-around wheels, good if you’re looking for something that climbs well while remaining quite aero.
• Ventum NS1 frame (750,000 Drops)

Level 31

• Canyon Speedmax CF SLX Disc TT frame (1,200,000 Drops): listed in fastest tt frames. The fastest TT frame available at this level.
• MUST BUY! Zipp 858 wheels (300,000 Drops): listed in fastest wheels. A favorite among many racers, the 858s are the fastest non-disc wheels in game, and they climb a bit better than the heavy discs. A good choice for the purists who just can’t stomach running a disc wheel on a road bike.
• Uranium Nuclear frame (700,000 Drops): listed in fastest frames.
• Canyon Speedmax frame (424,600 Drops)

Level 32

• Cervelo Aspero frame (800,000 Drops): the most aero gravel bike, it’s not a top climber but still a smart upgrade if you’re racing gravel.
• Parlee RZ7 frame (771,800 Drops)
• Roval Terra CLX gravel wheels (330,800 Drops)

Level 33

• Chapter2 TOA frame (800,000 Drops): listed in fastest frames.
• Ridley Noah Fast 2019 frame (950,000 Drops)
• CADEX 65 wheels (223,900 Drops)

Level 34

• Zipp 808/Super9 wheels (450,000 Drops): listed in fastest wheels. The fastest wheels you’ve been able to buy so far. If you’re into TT races, buy these for sure. Otherwise, only get them if you’re willing to look a bit silly sporting a disc in a road race.
• Cervelo P5x frame (1,000,000 Drops): listed in fastest tt frames.
• Cervelo P5 frame (920,700 Drops): listed in fastest tt frames, and fastest tt climbing frames.
• Trek Madone frame (1,050,000 Drops): listed in fastest frames.

Level 35

• Specialized Crux frame (950,000 Drops): the best climbing gravel bike, the Crux is probably the best gravel rig all around, beating all others on the Jungle Circuit. Pick it up if you’re racing gravel.
• Giant Propel Advanced SL Disc frame (1,102,900 Drops)
• Campagnolo Bora Ultra 35 wheels (250,000 Drops)

Level 36

• Cervelo S5 2020 frame (1,481,000 Drops): listed in fastest frames.
• ENVE SES 7.8 wheels (278,900 Drops): listed in fastest wheels, these are strong all-around performers on routes with shorter, rolling climbs.
• Specialized Tarmac SL7 frame (1,200,000 Drops)
• Specialized Tarmac Pro frame (856,100 Drops): listed in fastest climbing frames.
• Cervelo S5 frame (1,438,400 Drops): listed in fastest frames.
• Specialized Amira frame (730,400 Drops)
• Specialized Amira S-Works frame (802,300 Drops): listed in fastest climbing frames.
• Specialized Tarmac frame (786,300)

Level 37

• Specialized Venge S-Works frame (1,200,000 Drops): listed in fastest frames.
• ZIPP 858/Super9 wheels (550,000 Drops): listed in fastest wheels. The fastest wheels available at this level.
• Specialized Shiv frame (643,800 Drops)
• Specialized Shiv S-Works frame (910,600 Drops): listed in fastest tt climbing frames.
• Specialized Shiv Disc frame (1,000,000 Drops): listed in fastest tt frames.

Level 38

• Roval Alpinist CLX wheels (634,300 Drops): #1 climbing wheels (only buy these if you haven’t yet unlocked the Lightweight Meilensteins)
• Colnago V3Rs frame (800,000 Drops)
• Trek Supercaliber frame (750,000 Drops)

Level 39

• MUST BUY! DT Swiss ARC 1100 DICUT DISC wheels (655,600 Drops): listed in fastest wheels. The fastest hoops in game – you might as well just pick ’em up. If you’re at level 39 you’ve probably got the Drops to do it!
• BMC SLR01 frame (759,500 Drops)
• Diamondback Andean frame (950,000 Drops)

Level 40

• MUST BUY! CADEX Tri frame (1,500,000 Drops): listed in fastest tt frames, this is the current fastest TT frame.
• DT Swiss ARC 62 wheels 400,000 Drops): listed in fastest climbing wheels. A solid set of all-around wheels, good if you’re looking for something that climbs well while remaining quite aero.
• Pinarello Dogma F frame (1,081,900 Drops): listed in fastest climbing frames and fastest frames.
• Zwift Buffalo Fahrrad wheels (3,200 Drops)
• Zwift Buffalo Fahrrad frame (9,500 Drops)
• Pinarello Dogma 65.1 frame (577,800 Drops)
• Pinarello Dogma F12 frame (1,242,700 Drops)
• Pinarello Dogma F10 frame (710,000 Drops)

Level 44

• Zwift Safety wheels (710,000 Drops)
• Zwift Safety frame (3,550,000 Drops)