2014 Pro Team Bikes

Movistar Canyon bike

Here is the list of who is riding what in 2014. You’ll find all the pro team bikes for the 18 World Tour teams and the 17 Pro Continental teams.

Team Frame Components Wheels
Ag2r La Mondiale Focus Campagnolo Fulcrum
Argos – Shimano Giant Shimano Shimano
Astana Specialized Campagnolo Corima
Belkin Pro Cycling Bianchi Shimano Shimano
BMC Racing BMC Shimano Shimano
Europcar Colnago Campagnolo Campagnolo
FDJ.fr Lapierre Shimano Shimano
Garmin – Sharp Cervélo Shimano Mavic
Katusha Canyon Shimano Mavic
Orica – Greenedge Scott Shimano Shimano
Lampre – Merida Merida Shimano Fulcrum
Cannondale Cannondale SRAM Vision
Lotto-Belisol Ridley Campagnolo Campagnolo
Movistar Canyon Campagnolo Campagnolo
Omega Pharma-Quick Step Specialized SRAM Zipp
Team Sky Pinarello Shimano Shimano
Tinkoff-Saxo Specialized SRAM Zipp
Trek Factory Racing Trek Shimano Bontrager

What’s new for 2014?

  • There’s been a Dutch merry-go-round as Giant swaps Belkin for Argos-Shimano and Belkin pick up the Bianchi sponsorship left by Vacansoleil-DCM
  • Germany’s Canyon now has two teams. It has been supplying Katusha but now sponsors Movistar after Pinarello decided to focus on Team Sky only
  • Specialized supplying three teams; the US brand is part-owned by Merida who co-sponsor Lampre
  • Have you heard of Pon? Probably not but the Dutch firm is the parent company of Cervélo and Focus meaning it’s behind two teams
  • Colnago returns to the top thanks to Europcar
  • As for groups, Shimano supplies 10 teams, Campagnolo five and three for SRAM. A contrast to 2011 when SRAM was the largest supplier of components with eight teams

As ever these deals are commercial and those adverts saying “the choice of” such and such rider? More like the sponsor offered the largest sum of money to the team and management said yes, riders rarely get a say in what they ride.

Note the other corporate relationships. Fulcrum is brand belonging to Campagnolo. SRAM owns Zipp and Quarq so a team sponsored by SRAM will normally use their sister components too. Similarly those with full Shimano sponsorship have to take the full package of Pro components and Shimano wheelsets.

Overall there’s doesn’t seem to be a big change in bike technology for 2014, just a few new frame models. We’ve still got €10,000 top of the line bikes that rely on 10 cent cable ties to strap the CPU for electronic gearing to the stem.

UCI Pro Continental teams

Team Frame Components Wheels
Androni Giocattoli Bianchi FSA Vision
Bardiani-CSF Cipollini Campagnolo Campagnolo
Bretagne – Séché Environnement Kemo FSA Vision
Caja Rural – Seguros RGA Vivelo Rotor FFWD
CCC Polsat Polkowice Guerciotti Shimano
Cofidis Look Shimano Mavic
Colombia Wilier Triestina FSA Vision
Drapac Professional Cycling Swift SRAM Zipp
IAM Cycling Scott Shimano DT Swiss
MTN – Qhubeka Trek SRAM Zipp
Neri Sottoli Cipollini Shimano Ursus
Rusvelo Colnago Campagnolo Campagnolo
Team NetApp – Endura Fuji Shimano Oval
Team Novo Nordisk Colnago Shimano Shimano
Topsport Vlaanderen – Baloise Merckx Campagnolo 3T
United Healthcare Wilier Shimano Shimano
Wanty – Gobert Kuota Fulcrum

Note several teams don’t have comprehensive sponsorship deals to cover everything and consequently they use a mix-and-match of parts, for example Rotor chainsets with Campagnolo gears and brakes for Topsport Vlaanderen-Baloise and Garmin-Sharp are sponsored by Mavic and Rotor and buy their Shimano parts.

On the subject of incomplete sets, the list above is provisional and based on a mix of enquiries, and trawling Twitter and Facebook in the last few days and the info might be out of date. Suggestions for updates and corrections are welcome.

73 thoughts on “2014 Pro Team Bikes”

  1. Thanks for the overview. It’s sad that there are no De Rosa’s any more in the first two divisions. They will supply bikes for Continental team Vini Fantini Nippo.

  2. Two interesting things stand out to me. 1. SRAM’s cut way back with their sponsorship loot, to the point they’re behind Campagnolo at the top level. 2. FSA is a component supplier to teams at the second level. Does this mean they finally have a complete groupset branded with their name? I’ve been less-than-impressed (same with SRAM) with the products I’ve seen so far with their name on them so it’ll be interesting for me to see how this stuff works in the big leagues.

    • I have yet to have a positive experience with an FSA product. From BBs to seat posts I have found that there are details about their products that seem to be not-quite-well thought out. The track BB I had was so stiff the bearings never loosened up and the BB felt like I was dragging a brake. Racing on it was slightly frustrating. The seat post design is responsible for eating several pairs of bibs before I packed all the sharp edges with putty.

  3. The real number of bike equipment sponsors in 2014 is:

    Merida: 4 teams
    Giant: 2+ (Giant, Trek)
    OEM’d brands: Cervelo, Focus, Cannondale, Canyon, Pinarello, Colnago, Bianchi
    BMC, Scott rumored to own some production. It’s okay that it’s in China.

    It is interesting that whomever owns the Cannondale name at this point is spending huge on UCI team sponsorship. Is the EU presence for Cannondale good?

  4. It would be fantastic if you could explore the economics of equipment sponsorship and surrounding issues.

    For example: obviously no-one would speak ill of their current equipment but there’s a rare glimpse in Charly Wegelius’s book where he attributes a crash to dodgy pre-production forks.

    Thanks and happy New Year!

    • I’ll have a think but it seems to be a mix of things. On the one hand there are teams and certain sponsorship metrics but on the other the deals seem to vary from outright squads like Trek and Cannondale down to “here’s 60 road frames and 20TT bikes” and not much more. As we see with some World Tour teams, even the biggest teams are buying some of their equipment although often for value rather than outright performance.

      And yes some riders don’t like their bikes but for every malcontent there’s a rider who’s happy and several who just don’t care as long as it works all day long.

      • Are the days of custom frames painted to look like the sponsoring brand now only a memory?

        It is interesting that we reached a point where a single parent company owns enough variety of brands to cover all aspects of a team’s on-bike needs? Outside of the frame itself the components, wheels and clothing can be supplied by a single company in the case of Shimano and Campagnolo.

        • Yeah, I used to enjoy spotting the custom-made Dolan’s painted up in team colours. Doesn’t seem to happen very much anymore, unfortunately.

    • UHC (and precedents) have been through several bike sponsors in the past couple seasons. If I remember correctly:

      2009/2010: Kuota
      2011: Boardman
      2012/2013: Neil Pryde
      2014: Wilier

        • Nice one anonymous.

          I’ll bite…the Campy’s and Bianchi’s of the bike world have well and truly retired to the back of the garage where the dusty useless relics live. Right there next to the old uncomfortable English ‘sportscar’ that sputters and only ever goes 60 mph. Except, these ‘old world’ bike bit makers are still desperately grasping at the advancements of Shimano and their ilk, copying being the saddest form of flattery (because their copy products are just as unreliable and clunky as their old ‘classic’ stuff).

  5. sad to see Easton wheels aren’t represented in the pro tour. also if things go bad at least OPQS and Tinkoff can share bikes!

    I’m also happy to see Campy coming back and I’ll agree with a couple of the other posters, the Movistar Canyon is sick!

  6. Pon has employed Gerard Vroomen since buying Cervelo from him and Phil White.

    “In February 2012, Phil and I sold Cervelo to the Pon Bicycle Group. Pon is a century-old family-owned conglomerate in the Netherlands that has recently entered the bike market with great ambition. I will work for them part-time as Business Development manager on special projects…”

    Taken from Vroomens blog http://gerard.cc/cervelo/

    • “Pon is a century-old family-owned conglomerate” . . . You have to love how press releases try to make a corporate behemoth sound like a warm-and-fuzzy-family-owned-cottage-industry.

      • Note that it’s Vroomens personal wordering. But yeah, you’re right. And no matter how complex the structure of any given company might be, there surely must be a family at the end of it.

  7. I am aware that it is too big a stretch to say that the bike makes the winner. But it’s interesting to read into correlations.

    Notably, the year Gilbert sweeped the Ardennes classics and won so many other big races, he was aboard a Canyon. The last two years, Katusha has been riding Canyon with Rodriguez winning the World Tour both seasons.

    According to this – admittedly far-fetched – analysis, Valverde will win the World Tour this year.

    Anyone know his betting odds?

    • If I remember rightly it was kind of an open secret that in 2011 Gilbert was riding an aluminium Canyon AL painted to look like a carbon Canyon CF, because he didn’t like the carbon frame for some reason. So look out for Valverde having a bike with the welds painted over.

      • And lets remember others like SARTO, still create carbon (glued and wrapped) frames for some of the top pros though I’d wager this is as much due to the silly t-shirt sizing as anything else. Back when GIANT brought this idea to the pro peloton, plenty of custom frames had to be made up to satisfy the rider’s sizing requirements when S, M or L just didn’t work.

  8. I know we are in the era of marginal gains, but surely all these bikes are exceptional (and exceptionally maintained) and barring freak mechanical failure (e.g. Wiggo bike parking), it wouldn’t raelly make a meaningful difference to a rider winning or losing would it?!

      • Looking back at your highlights of 2013: for sure Voeckler would have liked some aero wheels and frame at Dwars door Vlaanderen (Did he take neutral wheels at some point? He looked like he was on box section alloy rims).

    • I personally know a rider in one ProTour team who said his current bike demands an extra 20-30w in comparison with his two previous bikes, which were from Cannondale/Cervelo/Specialized level (can’t say any more than this as it’s totally true and he has just renewed his contract). I tend to believe him as he’s always been very technical and precise. And whenever this pops up I recall the fuss tha Cav made when he stopped riding Specializeds and had to ride Pinarellos on Sky. These guys are splitting hairs, everything counts at some point i guess.

  9. Despite the claimed 10-20 watts less power loss @ 40 kph of the “aero” road frames (eg, Spesh Venge, Giant Propel, etc), those frames still seem rare in the peloton. Also, the GC contenders apparently prefer the conventional frames.

    The aero frames are often several hundred grams heavier than a conventional frame, but you’d think most of the bikes are near the UCI weight limit, anyway.

    FWIW, Giant claims their aero Propel is significantly lighter than other aero frames, and very similar to a conventional frame. Eg, view: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I2ZTWadMRw8

    • GC riders tend to think of the long term and are protected for the day-to-day miles. A slippery bike on a solo escape or sprint may give a huge short term advantage, but the extra weight on a three week race where most of your aerodynamics are pinned on the back wheel of your team mate in front of you, you normal frame can be “normal.”

      Case in point: How often was Froome in the wind? Flat/transition/sprint stages: Stick in the team. Mountains: Head on out, but weights more important than aero. TT; well, that’s a whole different bike.

    • Actually, the bikes aren’t all that super-light. At the Tour Down Under (2012), a magazine borrowed a bike from each team to analyse, weight, etc and most of them were over 7kg. Seems the pros prefer aero and stiffness over absolute weight. (Off the top of my head, I think only 2 out of the 18 tested were under 7kg and the heaviest was something like 7.3kg.) I found it quite interesting.

  10. The Bianchi colour seems to be a love it or hate it affair – put me on the side of hate it i’m afraid.

    I don’t normally get precious about these things but Bianchi’s should be celeste…that’s the whole point. Not only is it a colour clash but it’s possible a colour clash that has never been witnessed before.

    I expect there will be a few furrowed brows back at Bianchi HQ at the compromises that led to this 😉

    • Clearly Belkin has more pull than Vacansoileil did . . . the dark blue and yellow against a celeste frame was, umm, interesting. Personally, I think a Bianchi at that level should be celeste too. It’s just . . . right.

  11. Bianchi should have gone back to the Liquigas paint scheme, the color block was a cool way to integrate with the Celeste. Sad to see Pina end the relationship with Movi after such a long history with consecutive teams and Campy. All the bikes are amazing, and ultra light but we do love our porn and love to argue over the paint and the dream set up. Nice work.

  12. That Bianchi looks like the two parts couldn’t reach an agreement about the graphics and decided each one would do half the bike as pleased instead of a unified design. The feeling is that of an off-key song where nothing matches. Horrendous!

Comments are closed.