I'm going to build up a set of Enve wheels and I'm trying to decide which rims to get. There's not much climbing in my area, just short sharp rollers but relatively flat. This wheelset would be tubular and would be some local riding and some racing. I'm more of a breakaway racer, not a great sprinter but good steady power. TT is my best discipline.

1.45 front/1.65 rear - definitely the lightest wheelset
3.4 SES - the compromise, not as deep and slightly heavier but have a handling aero advantage
6.7 SES - most aero and look bada** but are heavy

I have a set of box rim tubulars that's the standard training set.

I would love to hear from those that have experience if the 3.4 or 6.7 are worth the weight penalty? And is the 6.7 worth the penalty over the 3.4?

_________________
Ridley Noah FAST = 7.38 kg
BMC TM01 = 7.96 kg
Raligh HiLife = 7.46 kg
http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=104672

I would be very interested in feedback on this as well. I have been seriously thinking of getting the 6.7's too. I am more of a sprinter, I do ride in the mountains a good bit.

I had issues with the carbo braking surface of Easton wheels and wonder how well the Evne's will stop and whatnot and how well the braking surface will hold up over time, when wet and whatnot.

Any feedback is appreciated...

I've got the 6.7SES tubulars, but with only 300 miles on them, and no experience with the other options, I can only say so much.

I bought the 6.7s for riding mainly in rolling terrain. That said, they are still lighter than the alloy clinchers I had been riding, so I don't feel like I'm losing anything in the climbing department. I also haven't felt that they are 'sluggish' to spin up to speed. I will say though, they feel super fast, and damn near magical for maintaining high speeds. I would go for the 6.7s over the 1.45/1.65 combo for the improved aerodynamics of latest generation design. I would only er towards the 3.4s if you were to be mainly riding in the mountains.

I have been impressed with the 6.7's stability in crosswinds. Having never ridden deep rims before, I can say they haven't given be any problem whatsoever. I have only ridden them in the rain once, and braking was on par with what you'd expect in an alloy rim. To be fair, I wasn't braking hard into turns while bombing down hills or anything, but I was pleased with what I experienced.

Let's not forget, the 6.7s are just dead sexy!!

I have a light set of 1.45 wheels and they are great climbing wheels. They can be a handful is gusty conditions that's for sure..
I'm also interested in a set if 6.7s. To complement my climbing wheels
If i could only own one set of wheels I guess the 3.4s would be the ultimate compromise..

_________________
http://fairwheelbikes.com/cycling-blog/ ... ee-z5.html

I think that the 3.4 and 6.7 are in a league of their own when compared to the 45s. The braking is much better, and they handle more predictably in crosswinds.
Between the two, I would say go 6.7s in tubys, and 3.4s in clinchers.

_________________
http://www.zencyclery.com

http://www.wheelbuilder.org

Thanks for the feedback. It would appear that the weight penalty of the 6.7 is not an issue?? That's what I was hoping to hear since asthetically that's my favorite set out right now.

_________________
Ridley Noah FAST = 7.38 kg
BMC TM01 = 7.96 kg
Raligh HiLife = 7.46 kg
http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=104672

The extra weight of the 6.7s will only add stability to the ride quality. They won't feel quite as snappy as the 3.4 when starting from a stop, but when trying to maintain some sort of average speed, they will be prime.

_________________
http://www.zencyclery.com

http://www.wheelbuilder.org

I went with the 3.4's after considering the 6.7's and the Firecrests. I can give you my impressions of the 3.4's vs. the Mavic Ksyriums. I've probably spent 30K+ miles on a few sets of Mavics over the years.

By comparison the 3.4's:

- spin up well (they actually weigh a little less),
- are very stiff on Alchemy hubs (similar to the Mavics)
- have a noticeable aero advantage
- ride smoother (maybe because they are new - but also because the carbon gives a better ride)
- brake well (honestly, the braking is about the same - the 3.4's brake like an aluminum wheel which is a huge compliment)
- have no noticeable issues in crosswinds. It's like the front wheel is held in place by a rubber band when there is a crosswind. It's very stable, just a steady pressure to the side which is very predictable and easy to compensate for.

In hindsight, I might have gotten the 6.7's. I expected the 3.4's to be more of a compromise on every one of these things, and the truth is they are the same or better than the Mavics in every category. Before my purchase, I was willing to compromise on some of those things and it turned out I didn't have to. If you are willing to compromise a little, then the 6.7's may be for you.

In the end, the 3.4's may be the right wheel for me because I ride on some short sharp hills. If I was on flat or rolling terrain, I would get the 6.7's without a second thought.

/

I own the 6.7s and have ridden both other combos. 6.7s and 45/65 tubulars, the 3.4s I honestly don't remember, I believe they were clinchers.

For racing, I'd recommend 6.7s for anywhere save the Himalayas.

For everyday riding results may differ. The 6.7s are well manageable in gusty cross winds, but you have to pay attention, which is cool on race day, but personally they are not the wheels I choose for a long ride at the end of the training block where I'm tired and drained from mile one and I want to socialise and not hammer. I just use low profile aluminium wheels, if you absolutely need to use your nice wheels, the 3.4s might be worth considering.

I remember the ride with the 45/65 combo was super fun. It could have been due to the legs or the company, but the bike felt very lively that day. Very nice accelerations, sharp cornering, good times.

_________________
"Nothing compares to the simple pleasures of a bike ride," said John F. Kennedy, a man who had the pleasure of Marilyn Monroe.

I am very impressed by my 6.7's. I have them both in clincher and tubular. + I have the 3.4's in tubular. My favorite of these are the 6.7 clinchers. I'll probably sell my 6.7 tubulars because of that. But the 6.7 with CK R45 hubs, veloplugs, latex tubes and nice tires is perhaps the best riding wheelset I have had. Light enough for my terrain, faaast and easily stiff enough for sprints and accelerations on hills.

Precisely the set up I have.

Works a treat. Both front wheels are also options I use on my TT bike, so have all conditions covered.

_________________
Baum Ristretto, Baum Mondrian Corretto & the '89 Merckx! | "If you could eat it in one sitting, hold your line." | twitter.com/Tinea_Pedis

Ordered a set of 6.7 rims, thanks for the advice.

_________________
Ridley Noah FAST = 7.38 kg
BMC TM01 = 7.96 kg
Raligh HiLife = 7.46 kg
http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=104672