New Enve 3.4 v Roval 50

Everything about building wheels, glueing tubs, etc.
Shrike
Posts: 1316
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 5:08 pm

by Shrike

I have a 23mm 4000sII here. Think I'll stick it on the front come spring :D

Cheers, didn't know!

by Weenie


Delorre
Posts: 966
Joined: Sat May 24, 2014 12:09 pm

by Delorre

Shrike wrote:Ah okay, but with these new ENVE's it should be okay? They're 29mm external. Guess that's why they made them like that :shock:


I run 23mm Conti 4000s on my Roval 32. Those are 21mm wide internally and around 28mm external. Perfect match!

Allen254
Posts: 144
Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2016 3:05 am

by Allen254

sethjs wrote:You all probably saw the updated 3.4 release. In clincher / rim brake form they're about 1400 grams. Their aero looks to be about equal to a 303. They cost $3200.

Meanwhile the new Roval wheels are looking extremely competitive. Likely more aero. Same internal width (21mm). 1375 grams. But only $2400.

I've ridden a bunch of Zipp and Bora wheels. No experience on Roval or Enve. Given the price difference and that the "climbing" 3.4 is actually heavier than the Roval 50, I'm having trouble wrapping my head around why one would opt for the 3.4 over the Roval.

Thoughts?

Id just go with boyds 44mm tubular or clincher.

Shrike
Posts: 1316
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 5:08 pm

by Shrike

Seems my rims are 23.4 external, so even if I downsize the front to 23mm 4000sII then I still won't hit meet magic 105% rule!

Rear should be fine with 25mms as my bike has a shaped downtube to cover it (S5). But the front would then need say a 21mm or the air just won't be captured? That's disheartening.

Would it be better to use a really narrow front wheel in that situation. A lighter one, as aerodynamics aren't coming in to play?

Delorre
Posts: 966
Joined: Sat May 24, 2014 12:09 pm

by Delorre

On my Addict, I use a conti force 22 at the front and a regular 23mm 4000s at the back. That front tyre is wicked light at <180gr, last long enough and is punture resistant. So, why not?

Marin
Posts: 3009
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2014 11:48 am
Location: Vienna Austria

by Marin

Take care with the 25mm GP4000S IIs, they come out as 28mm on 17mm internal rims already.

Hexsense
Posts: 523
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2015 12:41 am

by Hexsense

Shrike wrote:Seems my rims are 23.4 external, so even if I downsize the front to 23mm 4000sII then I still won't hit meet magic 105% rule!

Rear should be fine with 25mms as my bike has a shaped downtube to cover it (S5). But the front would then need say a 21mm or the air just won't be captured? That's disheartening.

Would it be better to use a really narrow front wheel in that situation. A lighter one, as aerodynamics aren't coming in to play?

No, Aero benefit is not totally Vanished. It's just reduced (see the graph in the article). So you still get some aero benefit over really narrow wheel.
Maybe you'll be better on some 23c that is not oversized, like Schwalbe One 23c or Michelin Power Competition 23c, etc.
Or fully aero 22c Continental Attack II.

Shrike
Posts: 1316
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 5:08 pm

by Shrike

Had a better look at the links and yes it's not all doom and gloom thankfully!

Interesting that if you combine rolling resistance and aero drag the 25mm 4000sII is still one of the best, even on a 24mm external rim. Even faster than the 23mm 4000sII apparently!

http://flocycling.blogspot.co.uk/2016/0 ... study.html

matty1000
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2017 4:56 pm

by matty1000

OK, here's the real deal on the CLX50's...been riding them since 2/7/17 and they are simply sick! I live in Denver/Golden. I roll 25mm Conti GP4000S II's and they measure 27.5-28mm ON the 29.4 external width rim. PERFECT in every category. What else? Hell no to paying $3200 for ANY wheel. Braking is BETTER than my aluminum wheelset. Then again, I only paid about $880 for the CLX50's as I sold my previous CLX40's from 2016.

BOOM! Go get 'em.

holsen
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 5:27 am

by holsen

sabba wrote:new poster here

At 29.75mm/29mm external widths front/rear they exceed most brake caliper and frame clearance thresholds.

AM I missing something or are these specs really upsetting the bike fitment Gods?


The 3.4s are 29.75mm/29mm at the widest point of the rim, below the brake track. The Brake track is 27.5 Front and Rear

sabba
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2017 4:14 pm

by sabba

thank you for this clarification Holsen.

Makes sense for enve to keep brake track below 28mm as most rim have this as max clearance. i went a safer route around time of my first post for wheel set.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post