# anyone riding enve 6.7 smart system?



## antihero77 (Jul 26, 2011)

If so what is your thoughts on this combo?
I am about to pull the trigger on these?
Please review if you are using these wheels. I do not need any other wheel recommendations.
Thanks


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/wheels-tires/great-things-over-enve-composites-249924.html

I've ridden them all summer and have about 3k miles on them. They are definitely my favorite wheels.

1) the best braking of any carbon wheel I've used (including some alloy wheels)
2) crosswind behavior is very predictable and easy to manage
3) fit and finish is better than any other carbon rim
4) the supplied brake pads are excellent. I also use them when I put my HED alloy rims on the bike
5) less of that carbon hum at speed than comparable rims.
6) solid, stiff rims that handle well when hammered on and through corners

I've ridden dozens of wheels over the years testing out the best from each company. These are hands down the best wheels I've ridden on.

-Eric


----------



## Zen Cyclery (Mar 10, 2009)

I would definitely disagree with Ergott on his third point. I will admit I only rode them once, but it was on a fairly windy day (15-25mph crosswinds) and I was hanging on for dear life. Keep in mind that I am heavier at 210 lbs which should make this less of a problem for me. However, they would only be good on days with minimal to no wind. 

On the other hand though, like Eric mentioned, they really do hum quite a bit less than other carbon hoops. Braking was pretty damn impressive but I really would like to test this in the long term. 

All in all, I was much more impressed with the 3.4 setup. So if you already have a "quiver" of wheels and this will be used rarely, go with the 6.7. If you want a daily driver that will still be aero but versatile, the 3.4 may be a better route to go.


----------



## antihero77 (Jul 26, 2011)

thanks for the feedback gents. I have dt swiss rrc 46 66 at the moment. But always considering a new pair of wheels.


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

Zen Cyclery said:


> I would definitely disagree with Ergott on his third point. I will admit I only rode them once, but it was on a fairly windy day (15-25mph crosswinds) and I was hanging on for dear life. Keep in mind that I am heavier at 210 lbs which should make this less of a problem for me. However, they would only be good on days with minimal to no wind. .


Second point, but I digress.

What sort of experience with similar rims do you have? What are you comparing them to? How many miles did you ride them for?

Through the years, I've logged 2k+ miles each on Zipp 303s (older ones), 404s, DV46s, SDV66, Enve 65s and older 38s. I've been in crosswinds with all of them as I train right by the beach. 20+ is a regular occurrence. I've been as heavy as 190 and I'm at 158 now (and this whole season on the 6.7s).

I stand by my statement that these rims behave better in crosswinds than the others mentioned including the rims with a lower profile. I wouldn't say they act like my HED C2 build or similar low profile wheels, but that's not comparing apples to apples.

-Eric


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

antihero77 said:


> thanks for the feedback gents. I have dt swiss rrc 46 66 at the moment. But always considering a new pair of wheels.


Are you taking about a 46 front and a 66 rear or both pairs? Comparing the 66 to the 6.7s the crosswind behavior is much better. They are both fast setups otherwise.

-Eric


----------



## Zen Cyclery (Mar 10, 2009)

ergott said:


> Second point, but I digress.
> 
> What sort of experience with similar rims do you have? What are you comparing them to? How many miles did you ride them for?
> 
> ...


 Well the first rims that stand out are the Edge 65s. I hillclimbed for 3 months on those in Boulder and I really had to kick my elbows out on windy days. The lateral predictability make me feel like I had to be on point where I find much more enjoyment in simply putzing along. And the 6.7s gave me a similar feeling, but with far less wind.
I will also say I really think your comparisons are illogical. Comparing the 303 to the 6.7 is definitely apples to oranges. The jump from 45mm to to 60/70mm is huge. They are a completely different beast. 
Rims in the 6.7 range of depth are quiver only. They are good in a wind tunnel, but frankly their practicality seems to be overshadowed by the big price tag that makes them appeal to us custom builders. Just because they cost more doesn't mean they are the most practical.


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

Zen Cyclery said:


> Well the first rims that stand out are the Edge 65s. I hillclimbed for 3 months on those in Boulder and I really had to kick my elbows out on windy days. The lateral predictability make me feel like I had to be on point where I find much more enjoyment in simply putzing along. And the 6.7s gave me a similar feeling, but with far less wind.
> I will also say I really think your comparisons are illogical. Comparing the 303 to the 6.7 is definitely apples to oranges. The jump from 45mm to to 60/70mm is huge. They are a completely different beast.
> Rims in the 6.7 range of depth are quiver only. They are good in a wind tunnel, but frankly their practicality seems to be overshadowed by the big price tag that makes them appeal to us custom builders. Just because they cost more doesn't mean they are the most practical.


Watch some road racing and see what rim depths are the norm these days. Sponsored riders may have to ride what equipment they are given, but many of them have choices as to what rim profile they can use from the likes of Bontrager, Enve, Hed, Shimano, Campagnolo, Mavic and Zipp. This is not only wind tunnel fodder. It's wattage savings over the course of an entire race. You can choose to ignore this, but the pros don't. The fact that the most modern rims are faster and getting easier to ride in windy conditions is win, win.

You are saying that you experienced more instability with the 6.7s than the 65mm rims?

You can enjoy "simply putzing along" with other options out there. I'll keep my wheels.

My comparison is not illogical. I can say from first hand feedback that I experienced less crosswind instability from the 6.7s than I did from the other rims I mentioned. How is that illogical?

Every other rider I have spoken to that has tested these rims, Zipp Firecrest or the latest SCT Hed Stinger wheels has experienced the same thing. 

-Eric


----------



## Zen Cyclery (Mar 10, 2009)

ergott said:


> Watch some road racing and see what rim depths are the norm these days. Sponsored riders may have to ride what equipment they are given, but many of them have choices as to what rim profile they can use from the likes of Bontrager, Enve, Hed, Shimano, Campagnolo, Mavic and Zipp. This is not only wind tunnel fodder. It's wattage savings over the course of an entire race. You can choose to ignore this, but the pros don't. The fact that the most modern rims are faster and getting easier to ride in windy conditions is win, win.
> 
> You are saying that you experienced more instability with the 6.7s than the 65mm rims?
> 
> ...



Wait really? 

You actually think the 6.7 is just as good in crosswinds as the 303? That is a blatant lie. I thoroughly dislike Zipp wheels however the 45mm depth of the 303 is far less finicky than the 6.7 (in crosswinds).


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

No, I'm not lying and don't ever accuse me of such.

We are discussing opinions here. You have yours and I have mine.

-Eric


----------



## HillBillies (May 16, 2007)

Hi Eric

As someone who has spent considerable time riding the 6.7's, would you recommend them over the 3.4's as a "do it all" wheel set? I am about to pull the trigger on a set of carbon tubs and am now tossing up between the enve 3.4's and 6.7's. Does the aero benefit of the 6.7's make up for the weight penalty and wind hand handling penalty? Weight is 200gms and wind penalty is ?

My idea of "do it all" generally means longer road races and hilly endurance rides in the 150-250km range that includes flat bunches, solo break-aways and some mountain climbs (20kms plus). 

Lastly, is the DT240 the logical choice hub (Campy free hub) of is there a better option? When i say better i mean lighter and more durable. I can't see how the DT190 price premium could possibly provide real world benefits. 

Many thanks

HillBilly.


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

HillBillies said:


> Hi Eric
> 
> snipped
> 
> ...


I think Alchemy hubs are the only choice. They are the best hubs. I consider Tune and Chris King R45 (when the Campagnolo version comes out) good second choices. DT is overpriced and has substandard flange geometry.

I think that if the majority of the riding is spend north of 20mph (fast group rides and racing) the 6.7s are a better choice. I certainly don't think 200g is holding me backing when I'm climbing. Aero wheels are always faster unless you are TTing uphill. I'll admit that the differences aren't dramatic, but if you are in the buying phase, get the most aero. A few watts saved is a few watts saved. People train a ton in order to gain a few watts of output.

They happen to handle real well and be a blast to ride otherwise.

-Eric


----------



## HillBillies (May 16, 2007)

Thanks Eric - much appreciated. I have a loaner set of 6.7's on the way to try out - they have arrived at my LBS but just waiting for the DT240 free hub to be switched to Campy so I can stick them on my bike. I don't know much about Alchemy hubs - don't see them down here much (Australia). Are they as serviceable/durable as DT Swiss? My mechanics seem to like DT for their simplicity. 

Cheers

Hillbilly


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

DT is only simple if you take apart part of the hub. To service all the bearings you need special tools. Alchemy hubs require special tools, but it's not difficult and there are how to videos.

-Eric


----------



## vladt (Oct 4, 2010)

HillBillies - I am in the same position as you are at the moment. The type of riding that I regularly do is almost identical and I also regular train along the beach road. I really would like "do it all" wheelset and considering both 3.4 and 6.7. 
Have you tried the loaner set yet? If so, I would really appreciate your opinion.
Having spoken to a few national level riders, they all agree with Ergott: Get the most aero and save the "watts".

Ergott - I head that both 3.4 and 6.7 are due to be released as clinchers. Is this true? Can you confirm? 

I was hoping for little more practicallity by buying clinchers.

Cheers
Vladt


----------



## vladt (Oct 4, 2010)

Ergott - do you think the older models such as 45's and 65's will get replaced soon enough?

Have you gents seen this site?

http://www.smartaerotechnology.com/wp/smart-aero-products/wheels/smart-enve-system-3-4/


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

There is no clincher timeline. I sure they will work on it, but it will require extensive testing again as the interface between the tire and rim is completely different. When they do make a clincher, it will be with the goal of making the most aero design for clinchers instead of what worked for the tubular tires.

The 25/45/65 will be here to stay for a while. My personal recommendation is to consider 25s for ultimate weight savings, or the Smart Systems for anything else tubular. For clinchers, the 45mm is still a great all around rim that has a good weight, ride, and decent aerodynamics. If someone is really concerned about ultimate performance, ultimately they have to go the tubular route, but I'd say that even if there were Smart System clinchers. 

While pros are limited to their sponsored wheel choices, you can get a good idea of what rim depth is appropriate for a given terrain by them. Companies like Bontrager, Campagnolo, Shimano, Zipp, and the like all have different wheel rim depths for the pro to choose from. For most of the stage and one day riding I see, they go for the 404/Bora/C50 rims. The Smart 6.7s were released first because they (and I) feel that that is the best rim depth for most racing situations. You save more watts and since crosswinds aren't really an issue there no real drawback. An Alchemy/6.7 setup is under 1450g which is competitive with the Firecrest line and the HED Stinger line (of comparable rim depth of course).

These aero shapes are going to be faster in the long run despite being heavier because you are saving watts the whole ride. Even if you are in a pack you still have to pedal. The idea of saving watts here and there by equipment improvements might sound trivial, but talk to a competitive rider about the amount of training involved in gaining 5-10 watts of threshold power. That's big.

-Eric


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

vladt said:


> Ergott - do you think the older models such as 45's and 65's will get replaced soon enough?
> 
> Have you gents seen this site?
> 
> Smart Enve System 3.4 | Smart Aero Technology


Good vid there.

PressCamp: Enve wheels - YouTube


----------



## antihero77 (Jul 26, 2011)

if anyone needs anything enve I have great pricing on everything enve


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

antihero77 said:


> if anyone needs anything enve I have great pricing on everything enve


Wow, way to contribute to the discussion.

-Eric


----------



## vladt (Oct 4, 2010)

Thanks for your insight Eric.
I am also hoping that HillBillie can post his impression on his "loaner" set of 6.7's.


----------



## Fourthbook (Oct 28, 2011)

Perhaps after the fact now as it appears his decision has been made, but for others weighing the same options, I went thru the identical purchase process and started a thread at FairwheelBikes forum on the trade-off between weight and aerodynamics as I searched for my do-it-all daily ride wheelset. I opted for the 3.4s as most of my rides are solo on flat to gently rolling terrain but often w/15+mph winds which buffet me a bit. Occassionally I ride in very steep (for me) hills so I also wanted the wheels to be as light as possible. I really like the 3.4s, and they seem less effected by crosswind than the Reynolds MV32ULs I had before, so I think they make a great daily-ride wheelset for nnon-racers like me. However, I would get the 6.7s if I could also have a second wheelset for hills and high wind conditions...


----------



## twiggy (Mar 23, 2004)

Eric, Do you sand down your pad when switching back from your alloy wheels to the Enves? I've seen numerous a carbon wheel scoured by the little bits of aluminum that get embedded in the brake track, but I'm sure you have as well and mitagate that somehow!... Just thought I'd ask!

Thanks!


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

I inspect them and give them a scuff if needed. I usually don't get much in the pads. It's faster than swapping pads.

-Eric


----------



## mtor (Mar 1, 2007)

Zen Cyclery said:


> Wait really?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I agree


----------



## antihero77 (Jul 26, 2011)

Ok I have heard enough. Just ordered a set of 6.7. But love the weightnof he 3.4


----------



## WEG (Nov 6, 2005)

antihero77 said:


> Ok I have heard enough. Just ordered a set of 6.7. But love the weightnof he 3.4


Antihero - how do you like the wheels??

Thanks


----------

