# Enve 45 or 65? Experience with both profiles?



## wedge962005 (Jan 4, 2010)

I'm getting a great chance to purchase some Enve wheels and I'm struggling to choose my rim depth. I'm either going to go with the 45 or 65 clinchers. I'm 6'2" 205 lbs and pretty strong. I want to be able to use these wheels as often as possible due to the cost so I'm looking for the wheelset that will do the most and be the most fun to ride. Here are my primary cycling focuses.

1. Racing in Crits and shorter road races.
2. Charity event and Gran Fondos in the 100 mile range.
3. Double Centuries.

Does anyone have experience riding both (or similar) profiles and have opinions? I'm worried about issues with cross-wind as well as the things I haven't thought of? If possible I'd appreciate any ride impressions between the two or some great compare/contrast thoughts.

For clarity, the 65s are lighter than any wheelset I own so I don't think the normal concern about the weight bothering me while climbing will be a valid one in my case.

Thanks in advance for your valuable opinions and experiences, this board is the best.


----------



## mimason (Oct 7, 2006)

Enve really needs to make a 50-55mm depth. This would be my preferred depth.

Several folks here are getting a 45 front and 65 in the back. This might be a good option for you. I am 175lbs and can handle 80mm depth fine but most say over 60mm is too risky, especially in a group setting.

There are a lot of guys I ride with rolling 58mm (404s or AC) and one riding Reynolds 66s. The 58s look ok to me but there is something about the 66mm depth that just look wrongs IMO.

Regardless at your size/weight you should be able to choose either.

FWIW, I have been flip flopping the same question but likely will pull the trigger on the 45s though because I am infatuate with these damn things. I will likely go 20/28 spoke count. If they made them in 50s I'd already have them.


----------



## Zen Cyclery (Mar 10, 2009)

I would have to second mimason. The 65 up front is just a bit squirrely for all around conditions (even at your weight). A 45/65 combo would provide the most versatility especially if your focusing in on doing longer rides.


----------



## gearguywb (Dec 26, 2006)

Running the 45/65 combo and loving it!


----------



## woz (Dec 26, 2005)

I ride the 65's about 80% of the time and at 130 pounds I don't find them hard to control in most winds. A steady wind is no problem at all, it's the gusts that get you. The main reason I like the deeper rims is simply because they look so darn good. 

If I had to choose one set only it would be the 45, or possibly the 25, but not the 65. The shallow and mid rims are a better all around daily rider set. 

I also wouldn't be one to mix them, I don't think there is any real advantage to doing a deeper rear. For example look at Shimano 7801 wheels. When tested as a single front wheel at 50km/h (W) The shallow 29mm is 24.4 and the deep 50mm is 22.9. I bet that difference is close to or the same as the difference between the 45 and 65 Enves. But move that wheel to the rear wheel where it is quite shielded and I'd expect that difference to dip to half or even less. My guess is we'd see a difference of 0.75 at 50kmh. Not enough advantage in my opinion to justify a mixed set. The only reason to get a mixed set for me would be because you like the way it looks. But it will be tougher to sell a mixed set in the future and it will weigh more for arguably no real aero gain and a slight decrease in handling.

The shallower rim would also give a bit more comfortable ride on longer rides. Last thought, a lot of builders think the 45 builds up better than the 65 with less distortion. While I'm sure you could ride 20/24 I'd also think about going to 24/28.


----------



## wedge962005 (Jan 4, 2010)

Thanks a ton for your thoughts guys. I'm sampling some 66 Reynolds for a week to figure out if I like the carbon rims to begin with. From that point I'm leaning towards either 45/45 or 45/65 based upon the feedback here. I appreciate the responses and the careful feedback.


----------



## Trevor! (Feb 28, 2004)

wedge962005 said:


> Thanks a ton for your thoughts guys. I'm sampling some 66 Reynolds for a week to figure out if I like the carbon rims to begin with. From that point I'm leaning towards either 45/45 or 45/65 based upon the feedback here. I appreciate the responses and the careful feedback.


My $.02.

See how you go with the 66's. I ended up with the 65/45 combination because I wanted something that was truly versatile. These wheels are light enough to be used on climbing days and aero enough for those long sessions in the breakaway at a race. 

Wind is a non issue. As somebody else has noted, it is the strong gushes that can be problematic but the problem can be lessened with a little bit of expierence. 

In a perfect world I'd have my combo plus a spare front 65mm for those days I want to go all deep.


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

woz said:


> snipped.



What this guy said. He's pretty damn smart in my book.

:thumbsup: 

-Eric


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

woz said:


> I also wouldn't be one to mix them, I don't think there is any real advantage to doing a deeper rear. For example look at Shimano 7801 wheels. When tested as a single front wheel at 50km/h (W) The shallow 29mm is 24.4 and the deep 50mm is 22.9. I bet that difference is close to or the same as the difference between the 45 and 65 Enves. But move that wheel to the rear wheel where it is quite shielded and I'd expect that difference to dip to half or even less.


Data has shown the rear wheel to be about 75% as effective in lowering drag as the front (I believe Zipp has published this data on line). So if moving from the 29 mm rim to a 50 mm drops drag by 1.5 W in the front, it will drop by 1.13 if used in the rear.

It makes sense to get a deeper rear than front because the depth of the front rim is limited by handling issues. The rear wheel has much less impact on handling as it can not steer. Further, increasing the depth of the rear rim moves the center of pressure back so that there is less affect from crosswinds on the front.


----------



## wedge962005 (Jan 4, 2010)

Trevor! said:


> My $.02.
> 
> See how you go with the 66's. I ended up with the 65/45 combination because I wanted something that was truly versatile. These wheels are light enough to be used on climbing days and aero enough for those long sessions in the breakaway at a race.
> 
> ...


Great looking rig there! Thanks for the input. Do you ride that setup on hilly courses? Ever encounter problems with braking?


----------



## Trevor! (Feb 28, 2004)

wedge962005 said:


> Great looking rig there! Thanks for the input. Do you ride that setup on hilly courses? Ever encounter problems with braking?


Since building the bike (approximately 10 weeks ago) I've had to use just that wheelset as I am awaiting a new front wheel for my Powertap SL set. That means I've been doing a lot of riding on the wheels and a lot of riding on hilly courses. In fact I did a Strength Endurance session on them this morning and regularly climb 15 to 28 per cent climbs. The wheels are perfect and that situation. Very light 1160 grams (or a little under), very stiff and brake very well. The wheels perform very well in the rain too.


----------



## b_new_b (Aug 26, 2010)

*Blacked out Enve 65/45*

View attachment 248524


----------



## 2Slo4U (Feb 12, 2005)

b_new_b said:


> View attachment 248524


that's one sweeettttt looking rig!


----------



## LarsEjaas (Jul 14, 2010)

I hope it is Alright for me to jump in here...

I got the chance to buy a set of slightly used ENVE 65 clinchers build on DT Swiss hubs.

However, am I right thinking that this wheelset will not be UCI compliant (Here in Denmark wheels need to comply with the UCI list of wheels for me to race on them)?

How about Aero-data? These are hard to find any data on: I guess the rims are very similar to zipp 404 firecrest and HED jet 6 in terms of speed?


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

The rims are UCI approved. Last time I chatted with someone for the UCI they told me that so long as the components are used in UCI approved wheels, a custom set of wheels using those components will be as well. Cavendish has used custom Zipps with Dura Ace hubs last season. Another example more recent is the United Healthcare team. They ride Enve rims laced to King R45 hubs as their sponsored wheels.


----------



## LarsEjaas (Jul 14, 2010)

ergott said:


> The rims are UCI approved. Last time I chatted with someone for the UCI they told me that so long as the components are used in UCI approved wheels, a custom set of wheels using those components will be as well. Cavendish has used custom Zipps with Dura Ace hubs last season. Another example more recent is the United Healthcare team. They ride Enve rims laced to King R45 hubs as their sponsored wheels.


Thanks for the answer: I guess that makes sense! 

However, looking at the UCI list, it has this text:

ENVE COMPOSITES
- Carbon 68 / 65 tubular 16/20/24/28 spokes
- Carbon 45 18/20/24/28 spokes
- Smart ENVE 6.7 Tubular 60mm rim 16/20/24/28 spokes

No mentioning of a 65 mm. carbon clincher ring: Am I right?


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

I would contact either Enve or the UCI for confirmation.

This was the contact I used.
Julien.Carron at uci.ch


----------

