I said that I did think aero wheels were worth it for road. No need to debate it with me or try to prove something.
Everybody should evaluate their own needs, events, riding speeds, and desire to save watts and decide for themselves.
For the record, I ride 50mm wheels. Are they worth it for regular training - No. Are they worth it on a fast paced group ride that hits 30+mph - Yes.
We were. But, when it comes to aero it doesnât care about surface. You mentioned your example of 19mph on gravel and that aero wheels were not worth it at that speed. So same should apply to road at that speed.
I asked my original question because I canât really follow 105% rule with 38mm tires. At same time seeing the specialized test show us that the penalty for not following that rule isnât as harsh as we thought. Somehow we got into discussion of whether aero is worth it for gravel. My bad. My original question was really to collect thoughts on not following the 105% rule.
I went up to supah wide wheels (25mm ID on 4.5 AR and Aeolus Pro 3v) and now Iâm going back. Iâm a happy camper on 20-21mm ID. 25mm tires on my go fast wheels and 28mm tires on my windy/cruising/mixed-surface setup
Also, I donât think âgravel tiresâ and âaeroâ belong in the same discussion. If youâre running a proper CX or wider tire, the only thing deep wheels are going to give you is more disruption from crosswind. I am all about aero, but I donât understand combining the two. We know from numerous tests that some 25mm tires can destroy any notable aero gains of a ~60mm wheel, so what would you expect to happen with a 38mm+ tire? The fat tires are already going to catch more wind - I say quit while youâre ahead (and probably lighter) and stick with shallow wheels.
But if youâre staying on topic of the OP, I still say stick with ~21mm ID with hooks. The new Zipps are super interesting, but the hookless bit is disappointing if you donât want restrictions on what tires you can run.
It would be fine to look at it that way but on a road wheel we have an aero optimized 25mm tire on that wheel and on the gravel wheel we have an aero un-optimized 38mm tire. Itâs not apples to apples. Also, go find an aero wheel model and see how much time you save over a 40k TT @ 19mph. Itâs not much.
To understand the data in the specialized video youâd need to know the speed and then apply the theoretical time savings to your own scenarios. I suspect that their speed is typical ITT speeds and not applicable to gravel. Would you be considering those wheels if they told you that youâd save 3 seconds over a 40k TT and 15 seconds at high yaw rates?
So itâs up to you - if you want to spend $2000 for aero wheels on a gravel bike to save a handful of seconds every 1 hour then by all means.
Iâm not anti-aero but you have to decide if the seconds saved are worth it to you. Say hypothetically the elite rider saves one minute on the 1hr 40K TT. You take 2 hours to do the TT and you save 4 minutes. You have to decide if saving 4 minutes over 2 hours is worth the investment in a $2000 wheelset.
So the recreational rider saved 4 times as much time but was that time savings meaningful?
Sure, anyoneâs free to think itâs not a meaningful time savings - my point is just that it exists, more so at non-elite speeds.
I run 28mm tires on the road because for me, they are better in every way. I still want to be as aero as possible. The tires balloon to an actual size measuring from 30-32mm which means I need about a 32mm wide rim on the outside. Therefore I run rims with a 25mm internal width and 32mm outside. Everyone will eventually see the light 
I think I got confused if we were still referring to road or gravel. Missed your earlier message. Apologies if it came across too strong.
Everybody should evaluate their own needs, events, riding speeds, and desire to save watts and decide for themselves.
Definitely. Is there a part of me that wants aero wheels because they look totally dope. Yes. Is it entirely unnecessary. Also yes.
No problem. People have been flipping back and forth between road/gravel.
DTâs page on aero gravel:
Most interesting points - 5 watts between a 25mm and 42mm rim according to DT.
- The difference between the GRC 1400 SPLINE 42 (2) and the GR 1600 SPLINE 25 (1) may seem small but it still offers a relevant aerodynamic advantage by over 5 Watt for all racing-oriented gravel riders.
- There is no possibility of creating a relevant sailing effect using wide ( >35 mm) gravel tires.
Get some narrow tires!
- Tire choice on the GRC 1400 SPLINE 42 with a 42 mm wide knobby tire (1) wheelset can make a difference of up to 15 watts compared to GRC 1400 SPLINE 42 with a 35 mm wide slick tire (2) .
- Under the aspect of aerodynamic performance - without losing significant comfort, traction and durability - the GRC 1400 SPLINE 42 wheelset works best with 35 mm wide slick or low-profile tires (2) .
- Choosing super-narrow 30 mm low-profile tires (3) allows aerodynamic performance to be further improved. However, this can be considered only for super-smooth and fast gravel surfaces.
So there ya go ⌠a pretty small difference. But if you are racing on smooth gravel or more road (like the Belgium Waffle Ride) then an aero rim and a 30mm tire would be the ticket.
Back to the original version of the question -
Prior ,the wheel width was constrained by practical rim brake width allowances. Everyone settled on 17mm internal, that put the outside at a certain width, and you couldnât make the brake work well or be light with a lot of variability in that caliper size. The frame was also built around that caliper size.
So what your saying is there are still gains even if not following 105% rule. Similar to what specialized video said. 10watts. Iâll take it.
Looks like aero is relevant for gravel after all 
I think what DT is saying is that you get those 5 watts with âa 35 mm wide slick tireâ.
They further say:
There is no possibility of creating a relevant sailing effect using wide ( >35 mm) gravel tires.
To me that says no aero benefit if you are, for example, using 40mm knobby gravel tires.
You know you can get 10 watts with an aero road helmet. That costs a lot less than carbon aero gravel wheels. Tight fitting race fit jersey is worth 10 watts. A skin suit is worth like 20 watts. Shoe covers - 5 watts.
But why use all those aero items in gravel if aero doesnât matter in gravel? 
I actually already use all those items, except a skin suit.
Who said that?
Really?!?!?! But why??? I love my Enves 4.5ARs, I think i benefit most from them due to my weight, 210lbs. Riding them at 70 psi theyâre butter smooth and supportive. I was thinking of buying the Pro3Vs for my bike if I could get most of the performance for half the price. Curious to hear your thoughts on how they compare.
And to stick with the thread and OPâŚI have no doubt wider is the future. To really understand the nuisances and design parameters of products you have to go to the extremes. In my case, being on the heavier side of the cyclist spectrum, its amazing how much better wider wheels perform. The cornering grip and confidence I achieved when switching to the ENVEs was worth the entry price alone.
Oh and BTW, no one seems to have mentioned this but tire construction has been progressing at a similar rate to wheel design. What do I mean by that, newer tires are not ballooning as much as they used to. I"m speaking for the new Conti 5000s, same for Schwalbes, all these newer Tubeless construction tires do not balloon up like they used to. Since the advent of disc brakes wheel and tire design has been evolving at a rather rapid pace.
Like every other Enve wheelset Iâve owned (which is now over a dozen), theyâve blingy and look awesome - but are otherwise overrated. It was a little harder to admit that with the AR as my set were the most Iâve ever spent on a set of wheels (Iâm a good deal shopper). I almost gave up on the ARs in the first couple days though, between breaking 3 tire levers trying to mount, them not wanting to seal with the supplied tape (redid the front 3x).
As far as the ride of them, if I was going to give the Enve an edge, itâs a slight one in comfort - but I was also running lower pressure on the Enve so itâs maybe not a fair edge / comparison.
In terms of handling, I donât believe thereâs any advantage with the added width. In fact, all of my fastest times on local descents are with my CLX50 and a 25mm (labeled). Iâm not sure what other way to measure âbetter handlingâ if not in terms of what helps you comfortably and confidently navigate a situation fastest.
As for the 3V, Iâd say they are every bit as good (better, for me) than the Enve except in terms of bling. Theyâre compatible with more tires, theyâre lighter, less affected by wind (due to shallower depth) and, surprisingly, seem to hold speed almost every bit as well⌠for half the price. Unfortunately, the freehub is too loud for my tastes on the road - so theyâll be sold as well. All <21mm ID wheels for me on the road for now.