New Enve 3.4 v Roval 50

[sethjs]

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?

[CrankAddictsRich]

my friends that have Rovals all like them... the braking seems to be above par compared to most carbon clinchers I've seen. The 50's are new, so I've not seem them yet, but the CLX 40's and 60's were both nice. A friend of mine has the Enve 4.5's and those are definitely a step or 2 above, but also a step or 2 above in price.

[spartan]

enve only company to have solved the braking in the wet butt the price premium is insane..

[raven14]

The new Enve brake track is far superior to the Roval one, in dry and for sure also in wet circumstances.

[Marin]

21 internal would be great for MTB tires.

What tire size do you want to run? For any aero benefit, the resulting size should be a bit narrower than the rim at the brake track.

[sabba]

new poster here

just looking at the specs of these newly released envy 3.4s aren't they pushing the fitment limits of most road bikes?

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?

[boots2000]

They are both nice wheels-
Roval is lighter- Though the newest Enve sheds some weight?
If you move through stuff resale will be much better on Enve.

[KWalker]

As someone who is getting the 3.4, I wouldn't normally pay retail for Enve. Their QC has gone way downhill with loads of people having to return rims because of voids in the carbon. It is now even noted in mag review articles. My LBS stopped building to Enve rims as some voids in the rim bed led to cracks.

Roval wheels are great, but if you are solely concerned with braking Mavic is tough to beat. I didn't feel my CLX60s were that bad in the rain compared to 4.5s I demo'ed and used the same pads. In most circumstances I would take the Rovals as they are cheaper, lighter, and perform just as well. That is, if you can get over running a Speci-made product on a non-Speci bike.

[spdntrxi]

new poster here

just looking at the specs of these newly released envy 3.4s aren't they pushing the fitment limits of most road bikes?

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?

Yes with my current Parlee I cant go anywhere near those


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kode54]

new poster here

just looking at the specs of these newly released envy 3.4s aren't they pushing the fitment limits of most road bikes?

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?

Yes with my current Parlee I cant go anywhere near those


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yeah...i'm out with the AX as well. oh well.

[Noctiluxx]

Why not the Bora Ultras? Just picked up a pair of Ultra 50's over Enve 4.5's. Will do a good ride tomorrow to get a feel for them. So far, based on some short sprints, they roll better than my Zipp 404 NSW's and are significantly stiffer.

[Shrike]

21 internal would be great for MTB tires.

What tire size do you want to run? For any aero benefit, the resulting size should be a bit narrower than the rim at the brake track.

Does that mean that the aero benefit of deep section wheels is totally lost if you use a 25mm tyre? Or am I reading that wrong..

[Delorre]

21 internal would be great for MTB tires.

What tire size do you want to run? For any aero benefit, the resulting size should be a bit narrower than the rim at the brake track.

Does that mean that the aero benefit of deep section wheels is totally lost if you use a 25mm tyre? Or am I reading that wrong..

You loose a part of the benefit if the tyre is wider than the rim. If you use a 25mm Conti 4000s f.ex, your rim should be 28mm wide at least, if the tyre is 27mm wide on that rim. So far the theory

[Shrike]

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

[Hexsense]

21 internal would be great for MTB tires.

What tire size do you want to run? For any aero benefit, the resulting size should be a bit narrower than the rim at the brake track.

Does that mean that the aero benefit of deep section wheels is totally lost if you use a 25mm tyre? Or am I reading that wrong..

read this article
https://silca.cc/blogs/journal/part-5-t ... rodynamics

in short, rim must be wider than tire.
Both rims are about 29.xx mm wide so tire should not be wider than 28.4mm.
Some big 25c tire on 21mm rim will exceed that but some will not.
But i think using some big 23c (like Continental or Vittoria Corsa G+) in the front is just better here as it'll be surely narrower than 28.4mm (most probably around 27.5mm) and also being big enough to fit nicely on 21mm wide rim.
Then put 25c tire on in the rear to be 28-30mm to get best rolling in the back.