The Shimano RC5W (RC502W) SPD-SL Women's Shoes are mid-range performance road models, with some premium features and trickle-down technology. I found them comfortable, though I'd say they're best suited to narrow to normal width feet, and at times the sole isn't as stiff as you might like.
They sit slap bang in the middle of the women's road shoe range, above the RC501W but below the RC902 flagship model. They come in a choice of three colours: white, black and a black and turquoise combination.
Upper
The upper is constructed from a combination of mesh/TPU (thermoplastic polyurethane) and synthetic leather material, which I found to be quite supportive throughout my rides. The mesh over the toes certainly helps with ventilation, and as the test period took in a mixture of high and lower temperatures, I'd say the shoes are more than suitable for most temperatures the UK will experience in late spring and summer.
I found them comfortable over various ride lengths, even in high temperatures, but I would suggest they are not designed for people with particularly wide feet. I usually wear a wide in Lake shoes, for example, and though the RC5Ws were just wide enough for most rides, I did suffer a little after longer rides; I didn't experience hotspots, just a bit of rubbing on the outer toes.
Closure
Each shoe has one Boa L6 dial and one Velcro strap for the closure system. These offer sufficient adjustment, but the dial can't be loosened incrementally, so if you overtighten it you need to undo it completely before re-tightening.
As someone who is quite picky with shoes and often has to adjust them multiple times during a ride, it was a little bit frustrating. Otherwise, the closure system worked well.
Sole stiffness
Shimano boasts a 'carbon fibre reinforced nylon midsole for power transfer', and I could definitely tell that the entire sole wasn't reinforced. Instead, under extreme load such as steep climbs, I felt that the shoe flexed a little bit too much – particularly given its stiffness rating (interestingly, it's listed as 7 on the website but 8 is written on the shoe).
The sole is compatible with three-bolt cleats, and I tested them with Look Keos. I found them easy enough to set up, with plenty of adjustment.
Weight and value
The RC502Ws weigh 450g, which is very respectable compared with others in the same price range. For example, the Scott Road Team Boa Shoes that Emma tested last year are also £139.99 and weigh 558g (size 42), while the Bontrager Circuit Road Cycling Shoes weigh 576g (size 43) – and they've gone up to £144.99 since Alex tested them last year.
> Buyer’s Guide: 10 of the best high-performance road cycling shoes
George tested the men's version of these Shimanos a few months ago and also found they represent good value for the price, with the trickle-down technology (the Boa L6 dial and the design and fit of the uppers) from the top-of-the-range S-Phyre shoes giving them a leg up compared with the competition. (The men's are also available in a wide fit.)
Conclusion
Overall, I like the simplicity of these shoes. They're not particularly flashy, but they represent a good value pair of road shoes. The sole could be stiffer, but I would imagine it will be enough for most riders. The fit and comfort is snug but in a supportive way, and my usually picky feet responded well to longer rides in the sun without overheating or too many issues.
Verdict
Good performance with premium features, and impressively light for the price
Make and model: Shimano RC5W (RC502W) SPD-SL Women's Shoes
Tell us what the product is for
Shimano/Freewheel says:
'Lightweight, high-performance road shoes with unparalleled power transfer, benefitting from S-PHYRE trickle-down technology'
Tell us some more about the technical aspects of the product?
Shimano/Freewheel lists:
Upgraded upper pattern and material improves fit and breathability, while reducing weight
Surround wrapping upper structure reduces overlap, providing a glove-like fit and eliminating hot-spots
Super low stack height helps stabilize foot, maximizes power transfer and efficiency
Integrated sole and upper construction sets a new level of fit, stability, rigidity and lightweight performance
Mesh/TPU/Synthetic leather composite upper provides comfortable fit and better breathability
Light carbon fibre reinforced nylon sole for power transfer
BOA® L6 skeleton dials ensure precise fit and comfort
Stiffness rating: 7 [NB: 8 written on the sole itself]
Rate the product for quality of construction:
8/10
Rate the product for performance:
7/10
The soles flex more than I would have expected with a stiffness rating of 8, but otherwise they performed well.
Rate the product for durability:
7/10
I have noticed some scuffing already during the test period, even with me being very careful to walk as little as possible in them. The heel and toe bumpers are also not replaceable so it's worth being extra careful not to wear them out.
Rate the product for fit:
8/10
The uppers fit nice and snugly and the ankle is supportive without digging in.
Rate the product for sizing:
7/10
They are not suitable for very wide feet, but I'm not sure people with particularly narrow feet would be comfortable either, unless wearing thick socks.
Rate the product for weight:
9/10
Very impressive for the price – over 100g lighter than similarly priced competitors in some cases.
Rate the product for comfort:
8/10
Rate the product for value:
7/10
How easy is the product to care for? How did it respond to being washed?
Dirt was easy to wipe away, even on the white uppers.
Tell us how the product performed overall when used for its designed purpose
Over the month as the shoes have moulded to my feet, they've become more and more comfortable. The only performance issue I have with them is the flex in the sole, which was noticeable during hard efforts, though otherwise not a problem.
Tell us what you particularly liked about the product
The overall fit, materials used and the light weight.
Tell us what you particularly disliked about the product
Not entirely comfortable for wider feet, and not being able to loosen the Boa dial incrementally.
How does the price compare to that of similar products in the market, including ones recently tested on road.cc?
It compares well, especially if you take weight into account. For example, the Scott Road Team Boa Shoes are also £139.99 but weigh over 100g more, the Bontrager Circuit Road Cycling Shoes have gone up to £144.99 since we tested them last year (and weigh 576g for a size 43). The Udog Tensione Pure Black Shoes are a fiver less at £130, but weigh 606g (size 45), though they are a different kind of shoe.
Did you enjoy using the product? Yes
Would you consider buying the product? Yes
Would you recommend the product to a friend? Yes
Use this box to explain your overall score
They're very good: a classy pair of shoes with sleek styling. I've scored them 7 for performance, but I think the premium touches and their light weight lift them to an 8 overall; they're definitely worth considering for the price – as long as you don't have very wide feet.
Age: 28 Height: 5'5" Weight: 55kg
I usually ride: Bianchi Oltre XR1 My best bike is:
I've been riding for: 5-10 years I ride: Most days I would class myself as: Expert
I regularly do the following types of riding: road racing, time trialling, sportives, general fitness riding, mtb, Gravel
Add new comment
6 comments
What makes shoes women specific?
On average, men and women do have different shaped feet (though of course that brushes over significant variations between men and between women).
I suspect in most cases, though, the real answer is more that the range of sizes they're made in is smaller.
On dodgy ground here, let's hope nobody notices the question.
I found this abstract
Gender differences in adult foot shape: implications for shoe design
R E Wunderlich 1 , P R Cavanagh
Affiliations
PMID: 11283437
DOI: 10.1097/00005768-200104000-00015
Abstract
Purpose: To analyze gender differences in foot shape in a large sample of young individuals.
Methods: Univariate t-tests and multivariate discriminant analyses were used to assess 1) significant differences between men and women for each foot and leg dimension, standardized to foot length, 2) the reliability of classification into gender classes using the absolute and standardized variable sets, and 3) the relative importance of each variable to the discrimination between men and women.
Results: Men have longer and broader feet than women for a given stature. After normalization of the measurements by foot length, men and women were found to differ significantly in two calf, five ankle, and four foot shape variables. Classification by gender using absolute values was correct at least 93% of the time. Using the variables standardized to foot length, gender was correctly classified 85% of the time.
Conclusions: This study demonstrates that female feet and legs are not simply scaled-down versions of male feet but rather differ in a number of shape characteristics, particularly at the arch, the lateral side of the foot, the first toe, and the ball of the foot. These differences should be taken into account in the design and manufacture of women's sport shoes.
Full paper:
https://sci-hub.wf/10.1097/00005768-200104000-00015
Thank you, most enlightening.