Looking to buy a road bike for around £1,000 but not sure where to begin? We’ve tested plenty of options in this price range and pulled together our top recommendations to help you find the best road bike under £1,000.
Carbon fibre road bikes are now rare under £1,000 unless you buy used or catch a major discount. What you will find, though, is a good mix of entry-level race bikes, touring models, and budget gravel bikes with wider tyre clearance, usually built from more affordable aluminium or steel.
You can narrow your options by coming up with a list of features you want from your new road bike. Do you want to fit mudguards? Look for bikes with extra clearance that will accommodate your tyres and mudguards, and preferably come with eyelets for full-length guards. Do you want extra stopping power? Go for a bike with disc brakes rather than rim brakes. Prefer a lighter bike? At this price point, a racing-style road bike with increasingly rare rim brakes might be a good idea to save some weight, because sub-£1k bike frames will be heavier than more expensive ones.
While a grand is still a lot of money to spend on anything, a bike towards the top end of this price bracket will likely provide you with many thousands of miles of cycling joy. There is very little in the road bike market you can get for £500 or under nowadays, so we’d recommend spending around £1,000 (ideally more, but we would say that) to get the best bike for your buck. Many employers also now offer cycle to work schemes, where you take a salary sacrifice to pay for your new bike in instalments and get it (technically on loan) at a discounted rate.
Choices are slimmer at this price point these days, but all of our selections here have a recommended retail price of under £1,000. It’s also worth keeping an eye out for discounts from some retailers, as some bikes occasionally drop below the £1,000 mark.
We might recommend a different specification to the precise model we reviewed to fit into the sub-£1k price bracket, but where this is necessary we’ll only do so if we’re familiar with the alternative parts use: for example, we might recommend the sub-£1000 version of a bike we’ve reviewed that has the same frame and fork, but a more entry-level groupset. If you want to know more about how we select products to be included in this guide, have a read of this about how road.cc reviews products.
If you’d like some more info before checking out our top picks, scroll down to the Q&A section where we answer common questions about road bikes under £1,000. Without further ado, let’s dive into the bikes…
8 thoughts on “Looking for a new road bike, and have a £1k top budget? Here are our best-rated road bikes under £1,000”
In that £1000 exactly
In that £1000 exactly scenario, beginners should probably be made aware that pedals will be extra.
This was a very good listing
This was a very good listing of bikes for under 1,000.
Few of the faults mentioned, like the tires having a dead feel, mean nothing because tires will eventually wear out and you can buy better ones. Or the weight isn’t suited for mountains, what a load of nonsense, the heaviest bike listed was only 11.6 kg, or 25 1/2 pounds, I rode a 35-pound mountain bike up a Southern California mountain roads, and then when I got to where I needed to go rode it up steep dirt trails; Even my first road bike I bought new in 1977 weighed 24 pounds, and that was considered light in those days for a non-professional bike, and rode that bike all over S California mountain roads. A professional bike back in those days weighed 19 to 22 pounds, so my road bike was pretty light in its day. Add on top of that weight we rode mountains with, we only had 10-speed bikes, not the 22 we have today! Said all of that to say this, those bikes will climb mountain roads just fine, remember this, it’s not about the bike. If you’re not a strong enough rider to take a 25 or so pound bike up a mountain road, then you’re not going to be able to do it on a 14-pound super bike either, it’s about the engine.
So choose a bike you like from any of those mentioned (or maybe something not mentioned), choose it for money, choose it for looks, choose it for fit, whatever, but don’t worry about some writer saying it’s not for mountains. These writers probably race at least semi-professionally, or they are retired pros, but they do A LOT of riding, and they’ve racing and training on 15 or so pound bikes for the last 15-plus years, so they are a bit spoiled when it comes to bikes, and thus they taint their reviews with that prejudiced towards bikes that are not up to their standards.
Quote:
Yes…and no. Of course no bike can turn a bad climber into a good one and a heavier bike will climb just fine, but as you mention, the heaviest bike here is 11.6 kg, or 4.8 kg over the UCI weight limit, so a 70kg rider has a choice between carrying 76.8 kg or 81.6kg up a climb, a difference of 6%, so the lighter bike can make the climb 6% easier or 6% faster, according to taste (6% easier for me please, every time). It’s not a deal breaker but it is nonetheless a distinct advantage.
Quote:
Physics doesn’t work like that. ‘Faster for the same effort’ might be a better term. 1kg of extra weight will add roughly 2 seconds per 100 metres of ascent. A 5 kg lighter bike may get you up a 500m climb 50 seconds quicker. Is that 6% faster? I doubt it.
And unless you’re competitive at hill climbs or hilly road races is it worth the £thousands you’d have to spend to get a bike that weighs anywhere near 6.8 kg?
These are £900 – £1,000 bikes, most are around 10 kg. Naturally no-one wants a millstone but asking for sub-8 kg bikes at this price point is utter fantasy, and the UCI weight limit is irrelevant.
Most people who want to ride uphill faster / easier would benefit far more from focussing more on their bodyweight and fitness instead of grammes shaved or saving 2 watts with an integrated handlebar & stem “because the pros use them”. A snug-fitting jersey or jacket and a bikefit would be next.
Clicking the Sigma Sports link for the Trek Domane, it’s a rim brake model and weighs 9.57 kg with 28mm Bontrager Hard-Case Lite tyres (360g each) and currently listed at £697. If it’s anything like my 2016 Lexa, which rides very well for a cheap alloy model (7 years ago the RRP was £600), then that’s a bargain.
The Domane AL 2 disc is 10.55 kg and £739.
Simon E wrote:
Well it pretty much does, a 70kg rider on an 11.6kg bike will need to put out 384W to climb a 10% gradient at 15km/h, to do it at the same speed on a 6.8kg bike they will need 362W, which is 6% less power so 6% easier. Whether it’s worth the money required or not is, of course, an entirely different question.
Absolutely bang on. Just turn
Absolutely bang on. Just turn up to any Audax event and have a close look at the bikes that are ridden very large distances over very hilly terrain. Lots of steel bikes with full mudguards, (heavy) Brooks saddles, saddle bags etc etc. There will be very few of these bikes coming in at under 10-11kg. These bikes (and their riders) climb hills just fine.
A very good argument. I feel
A very good argument. I feel like the gearing/weight combination should be more of a consideration. As an audaxer of the ‘chug along’ variety, I run a groupset with a 1:1 gear (actually less than 1:1 on my “winter” bike), which is why the weight is irrelevant. For bikes with a stock 34/28 lowest gear, weight really will matter to a novice rider!
This article reminds me how
This article reminds me how much inflation has hit cycling. When I came back to serious cycling a decade ago, there were loads of full-105 options for under a grand. I was blown away by my carbon BTwin compared to my old-school stuff. Now I’ve ridden 11-speed, I wouldn’t want to drop down to 8-speed again, so I mine the second-hand market.