Rapha, nice but a bit pricey?

Also shit

The thing is, that text is incredibly badly written. I talked to them briefly at SPIN last year and they seemed perfectly OK people, but it's not a good shop window:

a city pervaded by every type of cyclist.

Cyclists don't pervade cities, and neither do their types.

From the track riders revolving the velodromes

Must be a missing preposition, but is a poor way of approaching the idea in any case.

Clothing is an imperative element

I have no idea what that's supposed to mean.

forging the connection between the rider and the bike itself.

Urgh.

Svelte originated with the vision to transcend the beauty of cycling apparel.

This is, likewise, completely meaningless (unless you want a few more knots in your mind).

To design products focused so exclusively on quality and minimalism, that they create an elegantly versatile connection between the bicycle and the clothing that rides it.

Totally overwritten and how the hell can clothing ride a bike?

To design a truly timeless range, such that it permeates the heart of cycling, and far beyond it.

One could write what is meant so much more effectively, e.g. 'clothing that is recognised as timeless and seen as classic by cyclists'.

the beautiful unity of cycling, elegance, and lifestyle.

Urgh.

A jersey that provides the security and performance of an athletic fit, without losing the relaxed cafe culture styling that we love so much. This was the core belief from which Svelte grew.

It's not clear what 'this belief' picks up in the previous sentence. There doesn't seem to be anything that could conceivably be referred to. It can't be the jersey, as a jersey is not a belief, it can't be the security and performance of an athletic fit, as that's not a belief, either, and neither is café culture or its styling. What they probably mean is that this was their product idea.

Not only were design, quality and fit our key objectives. In a bid to support local manufacturing and skills being lost from the UK, The Heritage Jersey is 100% manufactured in London, Great Britain from materials 100% sourced in Europe.

Don't get me wrong, I really like the approach that's clearly meant here, but it's a grammatical disaster zone. The 'not only' clause would need to be picked up in the following by something like 'but also'. Then they write the opposite of what they intend--that they support manufacturing and skills being retained and built back up in Britain. Inserting 'that are' would take care of it. Contact clauses can easily turn out ambiguous.

That’s not all. The research, design and development invested into our range always had gender specificity at its heart. Requiring precision that few other dare to accomplish, we designed our garments exclusively for their respective gender, to satisfy our belief that fit is paramount to any cyclist’s draw.

'Draw'? Also, 'gender specificity'? What's wrong with something simple like 'we were always determined to pay equal attention to our lines for men and women'?

It is only when you first zip up the front of a Svelte jersey, or pull the straps of our bib shorts over your shoulders, or feel the warmth and protection of a Svelte base layer, that you will realise just how fundamental this belief was, and still is.

It's either a belief in, or knowledge of the importance of a good fit--what's it going to be? Why not simply say 'we know about the importance of a good fit' (as every good tailor has done since time immemorial). Also, it's quite hard to unpack the issues around 'fundamental' here; no-one wearing a well-fitting piece of clothing for the first time will think about how a belief is 'fundamental', but will instead simply enjoy the fit. The manufacturer, by contrast, can easily say that a good fit is fundamental to how they approach designing a product

I wish them well, particularly for manufacturing in London, but this text really needs to be re-written.