In The Know Cycling

The best road bike shoes deliver a superior combination of power transfer, fit, comfort, and looks.

Getting all that in one pair of shoes comes at a price, typically north of US$400, £350, €400.

Some of us can’t wrap our heads, or our wallets, around spending that much, even after considering the added speed and enjoyment we can get out of a pair of the best shoes compared to less expensive ones that may be some combination of less stiff, well-fitting, or comfortable, and not as good looking.

To help you assess the price-performance trade-offs when considering new road bike shoes, I set out to determine how the next best, less expensive models from three brands compare to their higher-priced siblings that we’ve ranked among the best and to each other.

The Shimano RC903, Specialized S-Works Torch, Trek RSL Knit, and Trek RSL Road shoes rank at the top of our review of the best road bike shoes from over a dozen brands we’ve tested.

Over six months, I rode the Shimano RC703, Specialized Torch 3.0, and Trek Velocis road bike shoes. Each is just one step below its sibling in their brand’s shoe model hierarchy.

These next best shoes still have many design and aesthetic characteristics that serious roadies look for, including stiff soles, dual Boa dials, and quality materials.

But they’re priced around US$250, £220, €250, or about 60% of the top-performing models.

To be clear, the Shimano RC703, Specialized Torch 3.0, and Trek Velocis are not simply lower-priced, less-promoted, most-of-what-you-need options to their more heralded and more expensive siblings that wave the top-of-the-range S-Phyre, S-Works, and RSL banners.

Instead, I found that the fit, comfort, and style of these next best road bike shoes are different enough from those of their best road bike shoe siblings and each other in important ways. That makes choosing between them a decision that needs to be based on more than their brand and price.

In this review, I’ll tell you about those differences and try to share enough to help you decide whether the price-performance trade-off is worth it.

Shimano S-Phyre RC903 and RC703

Shimano’s S-Phyre RC903 is one of our highest-rated and one of my two personal favorite road bike shoes. It has it all – a wonderfully sculpted heel cup, smartly placed top-tier Boa dials, laces and guides, and goldilocks levels of toe box room, ventilation, and insole arch pad options.

The result is a comfortable, glove-like fit that, along with the unbendable outsole you get with all of the best road bike shoes, makes for exceptional power transfer for road racers and efficient comfort for long-distance riders.

In my opinion, its sleek lines are quite attractive, and its distinctive blue and other glossy colorways really pop.

You can read my full of the S-Phyre RC903 by clicking on the model name.

The Shimano RC703 shares some important DNA with the S-Phyre RC903.

Perhaps most importantly, the shoe’s last or mold seems the same. I sensed no difference from the toe box room back through the heel cup width.

I also couldn’t tell any difference between the outsole stiffness of the S-Phyre RC903, which Shimano rates a 12 on its unexplained scale – all cycling shoe manufacturers are guilty of this – and the 10 rating it gives the RC703.

The Boa closure system and its dial, lace, and guide placement differ slightly. Both use the Boa dials that you push down to engage and pull up to release.

But, while you can turn the S-Phyre RC903 dials out to tighten and in to loosen the lace tension, the RC703 dials only turn out to tighten. You have to pull up the dial to loosen the tension.

The S-Phyre RC903 dials are also a little taller and have a more tactile circumference finish than those on the RC703. That makes them a bit easier to turn.

S-Phyre RC903 (red on the left) and RC703 (white on the right)

There are several other notable differences between the two models that, for me and perhaps for you, do affect the price-performance considerations and choice between them.

Comfort – I found the RC703 less comfortable than the S-Phyre RC903 during the summer months. The RC703’s uppers are made of a thicker, less pliable material. While the two models share the same pin-hole ventilation pattern, there’s a smaller mesh area above the middle toes for heat to escape in the RC703.

Below your toes, the S-Phyre RC903 has a cutout in the carbon sole covered by a fine wire mesh screen and comes with insoles with an array of holes aligned with the cutout. The shoes also have a small cutout under your heel without any covering but with a similar array of insole vent holes.

The toe and heel sole cutouts on the RC703 are similarly sized, but the rubbery covering near the toes has a less open area. The insoles that come with the RC703 also have perforations to allow the venting, but the soles offer no arch support.

Unless you don’t need that support, you’ll have to get aftermarket insoles and drill out vent holes.

These design differences in the upper material, mesh area above your toes, and outsole cutouts may explain why my feet felt warmer in the RC703 on hot or humid summer days.

On cooler days, ventilation is not an issue.

Staying with the comfort theme for a moment, if you have pronounced or sensitive muscles and tendons that run between your ankles in the front or anterior area of your legs (anterior tibial muscles and tendons), you know the feeling when a long or stiff shoe tongue rubs up against it.

Thanks to the randomness of my anatomy, I have that issue with just my right leg and find some shoes far less comfortable than others for this reason.

Shimano is apparently on to this, at least with the S-Phyre RC903. Those shoes have a pliable, rubbery edge at the end of the upper with a clever set of ribs and a mating friction pad to keep the crossover strap from sliding up toward your ankle.

In contrast, the RC703 has a stiffer, leather-like edge and nothing clever (or at all) to keep the flap from sliding up except tightening the Boa dial down more. I got used to the feeling, but I didn’t love it.

Fit – The S-Phyre RC903 comes with insoles that you can add medium or tall pads to for added arch support. While I still prefer my Specialized Body Geometry after-market insoles in most shoes, I find the Shimano insoles are nearly as good and use them most of the season in my S-Phyres.

Shimano doesn’t appear to sell just S-Phyre RC903 insoles and wedges separately to put them in the RC703s.

Instead, plan on spending about $40 for Body Geometry or Superfeet insoles and drilling out some vent holes to align with those in the shoe’s outsole.

Durability – While I’ve not ridden the RC703 long enough to rate its overall durability or how its uppers may wear compared to those on the S-Phyre RC903, I’ve already experienced the added scuffing around the outsides of its heel cups. There’s a far smaller cap around this area of the RC703 shoes than on the S-Phyres.

Style – The key difference between the two models is the choice of colorways and their finish.  While Shimano often adds “special edition” colorways to its shoe lines, the RC703 was introduced in matte black, matte white, and a semi-gloss sage green option.

In contrast, the S-Phyre RC903 is blingier both with its choice of colors and the glossy finish on most of the uppers and the protective heel cup.

Bottom line – If you like a glove-like fit with ample toe box room in your road bike shoes, don’t ride in hot weather, and are willing to give up some styling to save a big chunk of change, the RC703 is a solid alternative to the S-Phyre RC903.

At US$250, £220, €290, you’ll save US$200, £130, €60 compared to Shimano’s best road bike shoes.

You can order the RC703 using these links to BTD (BikeTiresDirect).

If you prefer the Shimano S-Phyre RC903, you can order them with these links to BTD (BikeTiresDirect), Performance Bicycle, and Sigma Sports.

In The Know Cycling is ad-free, subscription-free, and reader-supported. If you want to help keep it rolling without any added cost to you, buy your gear and kit after clicking the store links on the site. When you do, we may earn an affiliate commission that will help me cover the expenses to create and publish our independent, comprehensive, and comparative reviews. Thank you, Steve. Learn more.

Specialized S-Works Torch and Torch 3.0

Despite the high-level performance and broad acceptance among fellow enthusiasts of the S-Works 6 and 7 road bike shoes, Specialized significantly changed the last and several other key fit and comfort characteristics with its latest S-Works Torch shoes.

Key among them, Spesh seems to have applied the “go big or go home” alpha male saying to the design of the S-Works Torch. The shoe feels a half size longer than the earlier two models, its toe box is rounder, and it’s as roomy as any of the best road bike shoes we’ve tested from a dozen brands.

There’s enough room up front for your piggies to party in the S-Works Torch, a welcome invitation on long rides and hot days.

The width at the forefoot and heel cup also increased with the S-Works Torch compared to the S-Works 7.

Continuing with this roomier S-Works Torch design, Specialized got rid of the Velcro strap that was intended, unsuccessfully in our experience, to snug the shoe’s width just beyond the balls of your feet. Consistent with the roomier theme of the new last, they didn’t extend the lower Boa wire laces and guides to do a better job of what that strap was originally designed to do.

Specialized also moved the upper Boa wire guide from the middle to the outside of your foot and removed a lot of the upper material over the tongue.

To top off all these changes, the S-Works Torch replaced the Dynema upper of the S-Works 6 and 7 with a more supple and breathable one that rivals leather and knit shoes for comfort.

My fellow tester Nate, a veteran of the S-Works 6 and 7, loves all the changes in the S-Works Torch. His feet also don’t get as warm as mine on hot summer days in these latest Specialized road bike shoes despite going without the large outsole vents under the arches the S-Works 7 had.

He especially applauds the S-Work Torch’s wider heel cup and the shorter edges below your ankles that make it easier to get your feet in and out of the shoes but still keep your heels down on your upstroke.

While we both wear the same size shoes, and my feet are a few millimeters longer and wider than Nate’s, I don’t like the lateral movement I experienced in the S-Works Torch’s wider heel cup that led to blistering during my testing.

The unique dials Boa has supplied Specialized for its last few S-Works shoes feel wonderful between your fingers and make ever-so-slight micro-adjustments to tune your fit.

And while Nate has gotten used to but doesn’t love them, I fault these dials for requiring you to unwind them to fully release the tension rather than being able just to pull them up when it’s time to get your feet out.

I also wish the lower wire and guide went to the base of your forefoot to allow me to synch up that part of the shoes.

In contrast, I happily wear the Specialized Torch 3.0 during the spring and fall.

Not only is it priced USD$200 less than the S-Works Torch, but the Torch 3.0 wins me over with features that prevent me from enjoying all the other goodness of the S-Works.

Heel Cup – The Torch 3.0’s heel cup isn’t nearly as wide as the one in the S-Works Torch. It follows the shape of your heel – wider at the bottom, narrower at the top – and uses comfortable padding in the upper half to keep your heels in place. Recalling how much my heels floated (and blistered) in the S-Works Torch, I actually smile when my heels drop snuggly into place in the Torch 3.0.

Specialized S-Works Torch (left), Torch 3.0 (right)

Boa Dials – The Torch 3.0 uses Boa Li2 dials that pull up to release the tension. I smile again when I can quickly get out of them. Seems vain and/or stupid that the S-Works Torch doesn’t use dials that function this way.

Uppers – While the shoes don’t have any ventilation slots below your feet and only pinholes above them, the uppers are made of tough TPU (thermoplastic polyurethane) with a braided texture. The material isn’t as supple or breathable as what Specialized uses on the S-Work Torch. Its stiffness causes the outside edge above the tongue to pucker below the lower dial.

Specialized S-Works Torch (left), Torch 3.0 (right)

It has resisted scuffs quite well, however, and I expect it will be durable over the long term.

If your feet don’t prefer as much ventilation as mine during the summer, the Torch 3.0 can be year-round shoes. There’s also enough room to wear a thicker sock without any change in comfort.

Soles – While I expect they measure differently, the Torch 3.0 carbon soles feel no less stiff than those of the S-Works Torch; neither Nate nor I could bend them.

Instead of a small heel pad glued to the bottom of the outsole as with most road bike shoes, including the S-Works Torch, the Torch 3.0’s heel pad is integrated into the sole and is considerably larger. That gives me more assured footing walking around the garage floor or pursuing a tasty mid-ride pastry.

Specialized S-Works Torch (left), Torch 3.0 (right)

Yes, the insole on the Torch 3.0, like the S-Works Torch, is a joke. But at least I don’t resent spending another $40 on top of the $450 I’ve paid for the S-Works Torch for a real footbed.

Bottom Line – I’d buy the Torch 3.0 ahead of the S-Works Torch even if they were priced the same, which, of course, they’re not, just for the benefit of the better-fitting heel cup and pull-up-to-fully-release dials.

I still wish the bottom Boa wire and guides went further down my foot.

But all the roomy goodness from the midfoot to the toes is carried forward with the Torch 3.0. The last and upper dimensions appear to be exactly the same.

You can order the Specialized Torch 3.0 for US$250, £210, €230 using these links to Performance Bike and Sigma Sports.

The S-Works Torch sells for US$450, £350, €410 and is available at Performance Bike and Sigma Sports.

Trek RSL Knit, RSL Road, and Velocis

Trek’s approach to its next best and best road bike shoes is as different from Shimano’s and Specialized’s as the individuality of the Trek shoes themselves. They fit and look like they came from different design shops.

The Trek RSL Knit delivers the best power transfer, fit, and comfort I’ve experienced in a road bike shoe.

Its outsole is rock-stiff. Its variable upper stretch zones, closure components and placements, and heel cup shape combine for a sock-like fit and comfort. And its knit upper and multi-slotted outsole create a wonderfully ventilated sensation.

They feel and look quite special and expensive, and at US$500, £400, €450, they are both.

With knit uppers and in the stylish white color, it’s best to wear the RSL Knit on sunny days when the temps are above 50F/10C, and the roads are clean and dry beneath your feet.

So these are more for special days out than as daily drivers unless you’re lucky enough to live year-round in warm and dry climates.

The Trek RSL Road, with its more conventional synthetic upper, is a functional and aesthetic descendant of the company’s Bontrager XXX best road bike shoe, only better.

It has more toe box room than the XXX and even more than the spacious Specialized S-Works Torch. For those with wider feet or ones that swell during a ride or have bunions or other unique features, the uppers have a stretchy material Trek calls METNET (short for metatarsal netting) that accommodates your needs from your metatarsal area back through your mid-foot.

The uppers and outsoles are also very well-ventilated, causing Nate to call these summer shoes and me to claim they are “just right” for three-season riding.

Its wide, conventional tongue and Boa closure system gave us good fit adjustment down through the forefoot without any hot spots or limits to our toes’ freedom of movement. At the same time, the RSL Road’s heel cup shape closely follows your heel’s width from bottom to top to keep it from moving laterally or vertically throughout the pedal stroke.

It’s important to note that both the RSL Knit and RSL Road run larger than the XXX and all of the other best road bike shoes we’ve reviewed. The observations I’ve made about both Trek RSL shoes are for ones we tested that are half-size smaller than what we normally wear.

For me, the RSL Road is a roomier shoe than I prefer. Nate likes it as much as the similarly priced Specialized S-Works Torch.

The next best Trek Velocis Road Cycling Shoe is as different from the RSL Knit and RSL Road as they are from each other.

Last and Fit – First, my regular-size shoe fits me best in the Velocis. Second, it has none of the overabundance of forefoot and toe box room you get in the RSL Road or the generous amount in the Specialized S-Works Torch or Torch 3.0.

Instead, it has a glove-like fit that is more similar to the Shimano S-Phyre RC903 or RC703, with not as much toe box room as those shoes have, but enough to be comfortable. The Velocis has the same METNET technology built into its uppers as its more expensive siblings, but the Velocis’ version doesn’t cover as much area or stretch as easily.

The Velocis heel cup is sufficient to keep your heel in place but does so more so with its padding from the middle of your heel up rather than with a sculpted shape that starts at the bottom. Disappointingly, there’s no added protection around it on the outside.

Uppers and Closures – A wide, well-padded, and ventilated tongue, along with Li2 push-to-engage, pull-to-disengage Boa dials with wires and guides running down to the forefoot, do a nice job of comfortably tuning your fit.

The uppers have a durable feeling, textured finish, and small rectangular or tripod-like shapes cut into them for ventilation. That seems enough to cool my feet despite only two tiny ventilation slots cut into the outsoles.

Soles  – Those outsoles are a carbon and fiberglass composite that, rated 10 out of 14 on Trek’s scale, seem stiff enough for me, though not for a road racer. The insoles, like those coming with most shoes, are next to useless.

Bottom Line – While it’s hard to get excited about Trek Velocis’ performance, fit, or comfort after wearing the two RSL models, there’s no denying that these are very capable, well-made shoes. They are shaped and fit more like conventional road bike shoes, but the perforation patterns give them a distinctive look.

The Velocis also comes in a bright red color that will stand out to cars and fellow riders alike. You can also get them in white and black, the only colors available in the RSL shoes.

You can order the Trek Velocis for US$250, £230, €250 using this link to Trek’s online bike store and from Sigma Sports.

The RSL Knit is also available from Trek and Sigma Sports for US$500, £400, €450, while the RSL Road sells for US$450, £350, and €400 at Trek and Sigma Sports.

RC703 vs. Torch 3.0 vs. Velocis

Comparing the next best road bike shoes to each other rather than their more expensive family members comes primarily to the fit and style you prefer.

There are smaller differences in ventilation, outsole stiffness, Boa systems, and scuff protection.

They’re priced essentially the same, are well-made, have durable uppers, and useless insoles.

Here’s my summary of the key characteristics of the next best road shoes:

The Shimano RC 703 – Glove-like fit with ample toe box room. Superior forefoot fit adjustment, but tighten only Boa dials. Stiff tongue edge. Poor hot weather ventilation and scuff protection. Modern, burrito-type styling but basic matte black and white color choices unless you like the semi-gloss sage green option. Available at BTD (BikeTiresDirect).

Specialized Torch 3.0 – Roomy toe box and midfoot, durable upper, and stiff outsole. Good heel hold and scuff protection. Pull up to release Boa dials but can’t tighten across midfoot and some puckering there. Questionable ventilation. Basic black and white colorways with a moss green option. Available at Performance Bike and Sigma Sports.

Trek Velocis – Traditional fit with comfortable enough but no extra toe box room. Composite outsole. Distinctive-looking, well-ventilated, tough upper, but no toe or heel protection. Bright red colorway option in addition to black and white. Available direct from Trek or Sigma Sports.

*      *      *      *      *

Thank you for reading. Please let me know what you think of anything I’ve written, or ask any questions you might have in the comment section below.

If you’ve benefited from this review and want to keep new ones coming, buy your gear and kit after clicking the store links in this review and others across the site. When you do, we may earn an affiliate commission that will help me cover the expenses to create and publish more ad-free, subscription-free, and reader-supported reviews that are independent, comprehensive, and comparative.

If you prefer to buy at other stores, you can still support the site by contributing here or buying anything through these links to eBay and Amazon.

You can use the popup form or the one at the bottom of the sidebar to get notified when new posts come out. To see what gear and kit we’re testing or have just reviewed, follow us by clicking on the icons below.

Thanks, and enjoy your rides safely! Cheers, Steve