Kinesis Tripster ATR V2 frame

The new Kinesis ATR V2 carries on from where the original ATR left off. It's a brilliant multi-purpose frameset that's been updated since its first incarnation to follow the trends in gravel bikes as they've evolved. As such, it's a bit more towards the bikepacking end of the drop-bar spectrum than the first bike was, with a stronger frame, bigger capacity for wide tyres and a slightly tweaked geometry. None of the changes have really affected its prowess as a road bike, though, and it's still a superb basis for a mile-eating tarmac-based bike too.

• Pros: The same great ride feel as the original bike, more verastile and off-road ready without sacrificing tarmac performance
• Cons: A lot more expensive than the ATR V1, internal cable routing wouldn't be my choice

The ride: composed, comfortable, fun

ATR stands for 'adventure, tour and race', and as I noted above we reviewed the original ATR back in 2014. The original bike was one of the early breed of new gravel bikes coming on the scene, and it did really well: it was our frameset of the year that year, and I liked it so much that I bought our test frame.

> Find your nearest dealer here

It's the bike I ride most: fast enough to keep up on club runs, and comfortable enough for longer rides than I can manage. It's capable off-road, too, and pretty light to boot built up with a 1x drivetrain. I love it. It's a gem.

So of course, when I first hopped aboard the V2 bike the first thought I had was, 'I hope they haven't bollocksed it up'. And they haven't. So that's good.

The ATR V2 shares more than a passing family resemblance to the original in terms of ride. And that's a good thing, because that bike was hard to beat in terms of long-distance ride comfort. The bike is fairly upright: the 60cm version I'm riding has a 210mm head tube and a 585mm effective top tube. The stack-to-reach ratio is 1.6, which is very upright for a road bike; it's noticeably taller than most endurance bikes you'll ride.

That rangy geometry doesn't make for a vague frame, though: the ATR V2 feels crisp and springy, like a good titanium bike should. It's comfortable and engaging, with good feedback to the rider without any jarring.

I used the ATR V2 with two different wheelsets, in two sizes, because you can. The old ATR could take some decent sized tyres; the stated limit was 40mm on a 700C rim but I squeezed 42mm Surly Knards in just fine. The V2 bike has increased that to 45mm, or 40mm with mudguards, but it's also designed to work with 650B wheels. This is a very old standard, of course, but it wasn't really on the radar when the original frameset was released. Now it's everywhere, and tyre choices are expanding all the time.

Using 650B means you can fit a bigger tyre for the same relative wheel size, because you have a smaller wheel. I was lucky enough to have a pair of Reynolds' new ATR 650B carbon wheels in for test, and also Schwalbe's peerless G-One Speed – my favourite tyre by a stretch – in a new 650x40 size.

That extra capacity means you can run the tyres at a lower pressure. I went as low as 30psi for mixed riding but the sweetspot was about 45psi, where they don't feel any slower than smaller tyres on bigger rims, and indeed my non-scientific Strava times suggest they're not meaningfully different. They're a lot more forgiving, though, so you get lots more comfort without really sacrificing speed. The ATR V2 will take up to a 50mm tyre in 650B, so you can fit things like WTB's very popular 47mm Horizon tyre, or a more aggressive cyclo-cross or mountain bike tyre if you're heading off-road.

I also tried the bike with a set of Alex CXD4 700C wheels, which are a great choice for a road-centred build. I ran them with the 30mm G-One Speed tyres and was very impressed with them during testing; they're a great complement to the frame.

The bike wasn't noticeably quicker with the more road-orientated wheelset, but then again the carbon Reynolds wheels are very light and about four times as expensive, so that's maybe not too much of a surprise. Built either way, it's still a fantastic bike for eating the miles, just like the original ATR was.

Thru-axle and disc updates

The new frame has a 12mm thru-axle at the back, where the old one had a standard quick release. I prefer thru-axles for fitting disc brake wheels because they tend to relocate more accurately and the tolerances with discs are pretty fine. I didn't notice that it materially affected the rear end stiffness, but it won't hurt.

You can swap out the replaceable inserts in the frame to switch to quick release if you fancy, which you might consider if you already have some QR wheels you're happy with, or you're heading anywhere not as far along the gravel bike curve as the UK is. Even here it can be hard to get thru-axle wheel spares, or a replacement wheel if you trash one.

Our test bike had a Kinesis Tripster fork that's also 12mm thru-axle, but these days Kinesis sells the ATR V2 as a frame only, and you can spec whatever fork suits your fancy.

Disc brakes have moved predominantly to flat mount now, and the Tripster has followed that trend. The original bike had a post mount above the seatstay, like you'd find on a hardtail mountain bike. The original fork wasn't even post mount: it was IS mount, which is the standard before that. Like I said above, it was an early adopter. In theory that seatstay-mounted calliper could mean issues with mudguard and rack stays. In practice I've never had any issues and I've fitted both.

The new frame comes with the same braze-ones for rack and mudguards, and ups the bottle boss count to three, with a third pair under the down tube. That's a spot commonly used by bikepackers for stowing tools in a tool bottle, or fuel for a stove. The bottom bracket has been raised on the new bike by 5mm, so you get a bit more clearance over the rough stuff, but if you're running the ATR V2 with a 1x transmission and a fairly small chainring – as you might well be if you're building it up as a mixed-surface bikepacker – then it's worth noting that a bottle mounted there might be the thing that grounds first.

Cable talk

Another thing that's changed is that the bike is internally routed now, so cables and hoses (and Di2 wires) pass through the frame. It makes the bike look neater, and there's an argument that you're less likely to get muck in your cables, but for a bike like this I think I'd prefer to stick to external routing, at least for shifting, with the exception of adding Di2 ports so that system can be used internally.

Why? Well, it's just less of a faff. The cables on the first ATR had standard stops on the down tube and a guide plate under the bottom bracket. That means there's more chance of gunging them up, but it also means they're a lot simpler to swap out. The internal routing of the new frame is neater and more protected, but replacing a cable isn't something I'd relish as a roadside repair. The rear gear cable leaves the frame at the bottom bracket and re-enters at the seatstay, so there's still an opportunity for muck to get in.

There's no doubt the new bike looks better when it's shiny and bare, but once you start adding lights and bags there's no meaningful difference. Personally I'd take the utility of external routing for a bike designed to be taken off the beaten track, and instead of cable stops run a full external outer to keep the shifting smoother for longer. Your mileage may vary there.

Overall: still a gem, but maybe the price takes the shine off a touch

Five years is a long development cycle in bike terms, and the new ATR has added extra versatility to what was already a very capable bike. Now it's more squarely aimed at mixed surface riding, as the Gran Fondo Ti Disc has more or less stepped in to fill the gap if you want a titanium disc bike predominantly for the road.

Most of the updates are what you'd expect, and the bike certainly doesn't suffer as a result. Thru-axle compatibility, flat mount discs, more tyre clearance and internal routing are all trends; I'd take three of them. Call me a bluff old traditionalist if you will, but I don't think a bike like this is the better for internally routed cables.

The main thing, though, is that the ATR V2 is a sweet ride, and perfect as the basis for a long-distance, gravel or bikepacking build. The frame is responsive, taut and springy, and it's a lovely thing to be aboard. I've ridden the original for years and I don't think I've ever had a better all-rounder. I've had enough miles on the new bike to be convinced that nothing important has changed.

Five years is a long time in politics too, and we've had the Brexit vote and a hefty devaluation of the pound. That's affected bike prices across the board but it has to be said that the ATR seems to have suffered more than most. The original bike was £1,499 for the frame and fork; the new bike is a frame only at £1,850. Adding the Kinesis Tripster Disc TA fork that I have on this build – which is probably a step up in quality from the original fork, which was the only weak point of the first bike – brings the total to £2,090. So it's over 40% more expensive.

> road.cc Adventure and Cyclocross Bike of the Year 2017-18

That doesn't necessarily make it poor value, because it's an excellent frameset. But it does bring it closer to competition with a custom build, and make other framesets look quite tempting. The Reilly Gradient for example is £1,799 for the frame and fork, and we liked that one a lot when we tested it.

I'd still recommend the ATR V2 to anyone who wants a truly versatile bike that's fast on road and capable off it, though. If you want a bike that's ready for the Transcontinental and quick enough for the chaingang, there aren't many options. This is one, and it's a beauty.

Verdict

The new version of a road.cc favourite rides just as well as the original