Geometry Review - Ridley FALCN RS 2.0
Updated: 19 hours ago
In the road bike world, frame design is shifting dramatically, and Belgian manufacturer Ridley has thrown caution to the wind with its new “climbing bike”.
At first glance, the new Ridley FALCN RS 2.0 is unassuming. But a closer look shows Ridley is among a handful of brands leading the next generation of road bike designs. These new frame designs reflect the manufacturer's attempt to rethink decades-old geometry norms and align them with modern race positions that are vastly different from what they were a decade ago.
In this post, I will review the geometry changes Ridley made to the RS 2.0, compare it to the first-generation RS, and discuss what these changes mean from a bike-fit perspective.
For the geometry comparison, I always look at the frame size recommended for myself, a fairly typical 179cm rider. Based on my height and leg length, Ridley recommends a Medium frame size, which matches the medium-to-large frames most other manufacturers recommend.
Frame Stack & Reach
Ridley has made some drastic changes to the front end of the new FALCN.
Stack height has increased by 11mm on the medium frame compared to the previous version. This aligns with the current trend of racers positioning their hands higher as they refine their aerodynamic position with hands on the brake hoods.
Compared to other race-geometry bikes, the 563 mm stack height is fairly middle-of-the-road. It’s considerably lower than the new Trek Madone but a couple of centimetres higher than a Medium Giant TCR or Ridley Noah FAST.
The reach length is the real talking point of this frame, and a change I’ve been calling for as a bike fitter and frame designer for some time. At 425mm, it is one of the longest frame reach lengths I’ve seen on a bike this size.
Ridley has increased the frame reach length by a whopping 28mm on the new RS 2.0. To put that change in perspective, the frame-reach difference between an XS and XL Trek Madone is just 14mm. 28mm of extra reach is significant, and from a bike fitter's perspective, I think it’s entirely justified.
This new generation of longer frames is designed for riders who adopt a modern, aggressive saddle position, where the seat sits much closer to the front of the bike than it could when saddles had long noses, and the 50mm saddle-to-BB setback rule still applied to UCI-sanctioned events.
One potential downside of running an aggressive saddle position relative to the bottom bracket is that much longer headstems are required to let the rider hold a balanced posture. This also shifts more weight forward to the front wheel, and bike handling can be compromised.
Lengthening the frame, as Ridley has done here, shifts the rider’s centre of mass away from the front wheel and some weight back onto the rear wheel. This benefit assumes a rider is already using an aggressive saddle position on their current setup.
Seat Tube and Post
Ridley increased the seat tube angle by a whopping 3 degrees to promote the aggressive saddle position we mentioned. The previous version used progressively slacker seat tube angles as frame sizes increased, but Ridley chose a 76° angle for all sizes of the new RS 2.0.
For a rider around 5’10” tall, increasing the seat tube angle by 3 degrees moves the saddle position range close to 40mm further forward than the original FALCN RS frame. That means if you like a classic, more laid-back position, this bike probably isn't for you.
Ridley has also tweaked the seatpost setback on the Medium, shifting from a 6mm setback to 0 offset. So this brings the overall saddle fore-aft range approximately 45mm closer to the bottom bracket if you have a saddle height of 76cm.
For reference, most race-geometry road bikes have a seat tube angle of 73.5 degrees. That angle has persisted for the two decades I’ve been bike fitting.
Bottom Bracket Drop.
Another thing I’ve wanted to see on modern race bikes is increased bottom bracket drop to offset the larger tyre sizes and reduced crank lengths we are seeing.
Compared to the last version, Ridley has increased the bottom bracket drop by 8mm. This lowers the overall centre of mass and should improve both handling and aerodynamics. For reference, some race frames still have a 66-68 mm BB drop, which is great for reducing pedal strike when cornering on long cranks or if you want to run 20mm tyres. But I feel like days of BB drops in the 60s are fading fast.
The RS 2’s 78mm drop is the largest I’ve come across so far for a road frame this size.
Cranks
On the medium Ridley, the standard crank length remains unchanged at 170mm. This is typical for a bike this size, but it also looks like Ridley offers a 165mm option through its customisation program on its website. Ridley has opened the door for riders to try these shorter cranks.
Many riders have to raise their saddle and handlebars when switching to shorter cranks, but the RS 2.0’s increased bottom bracket drop keeps the centre of mass and rider position low.
A handful of manufacturers still use 172.5mm cranks, but, once again, I think cranks longer than 170mm will soon be a thing of the past on bikes this size.
Cockpit
Ridley’s integrated cockpit that Ridley is using has fairly typical geometry compared to other bars on the market. 75mm reach and 125mm drop have been the standard for some time. I wouldn’t be surprised if we see a trend back to slightly deeper drops as handlebar heights increase. I've already noticed Canyon begin to make this shift away from super-shallow drops.
The medium frame comes listed with a 36cm bar measured at the top of the drops. This is essentially the narrowest bar you can race under UCI technical regulations.
Riders running bars this narrow need to be careful not to position their brake hoods too narrow.
If you like a 10-degree inward brake flare, a 38cm bar will likely give you more scope for angle adjustments than the 36, which will require a fairly straight hood position.
It looks like you can easily tailor cockpit width and stem length to the rider when purchasing the bike.
The default stem length on the Medium frame is 110mm, again fairly standard for this size bike.
For riders who want to keep the same fit as the previous-generation model, you would effectively need to run an 80mm stem to offset the increased frame length. But honestly, why buy this bike if you don’t want to refine your position to benefit from the new progressive geometry?
One minor gripe is that Ridley doesn’t mention the stem angle on their website. As far as I can eyeball it, I’d estimate the standard cockpit angle is about -10 degrees, slightly steeper than average.
Summing Up the New Ridley FALCN RS 2.0
Overall, I think Ridley’s new FALCN RS 2.0 is an absolute game-changer among aggressive-geometry road bikes. It has longer frame reach than its aero race stablemate, the Noah FAST 2, and a steeper seat tube angle than everything except the Factor ONE.
The geometry changes should give racing cyclists more room for fine adjustments, especially those who currently have their saddle jammed as far forward on the rails as possible.
Handling and comfort should improve compared to aggressive positions retrofitted onto traditional frame designs that are suited to more saddle setback.
People sometimes ask me what I predict will happen to bike designs in the future, and with this bike I can confidently say I believe this is the future for race bikes, at least.
Veteran cyclists with decades of experience riding in traditional positions, or those who raced with long saddles and the 50mm setback rule, might find the geometry changes on this RS 2 a bit much. But for younger racers and newcomers to the sport, the Ridley FALCON RS2 will offer a modern position without overly compromising handling or comfort.
As a bike fitter, I applaud Ridley for having the confidence to bring out this frame.
Expect to see most other brands bring out bikes with similar geometries in the next couple of years.
Comments