I literally just got notified about this form our team mailing list…haven’t had a chance yet to really dig into the specs, but ENVE has launched a revamped SES wheel lineup.
Chad I swear to gawd I was in the middle of editing the post to be sub-categorized under Equipment…damn you are fast!!
So looks like widths are bumped up substantially, both internally and externally…25mm inside, 32mm outside. Aero optimized for 27-28mm tires. Minimum tire width of 27mm. (for the 4.5’s)
6.7’s are a bit narrower (23 / 30mm), minimum tire width of 25, optimized for 27-28
James at CT did a nice write up
Everything hookless now
the 3.4’s have the same width specs as the 4.5’s.
The 2.3’s are LIGHT…1193g for the pair!! “only” 21/25 width for those wheels.
Unsurprising after the Foundation wheels came out, but all of the rims are now hookless.
I’ve been riding the new SES 4.5. Here’s my take
I’ve heard that mounting tires on the OG Enve 4.5 AR was a challenge…but that the 3.4 AR wasn’t as bad sue to some minor change. How is it with these new 4.5’s?
I have had those as well for almost 2 years now. Love them so much.
New models came out today
I meant the older ses. I saw the article and a huge enve fan. No need for me to replace them as they are bomb proof.
I’ve mounted multiple tubeless tire brands and models on both the 4.5 AR and 3.4 AR and never found the wheel to be a difference-maker. Didn’t find mounting tires (Schwalbe Pro One TLE and Conti GP 5000 S TR) on the new 4.5 was any different than mounting them on the ARs. It’s almost always about the tire or the tire-rim combination.
Can you actually run these with tubes or is it only tubeless?
Yes, you can run them with tubes if you choose, but you still need to use a compatible tire.
I’m considering either the ses 6.7 or the zipp 404 firecrest. Looking for something aero around 60mm. It seems these are on different tiers, but really looking to understand the differences between the two. What makes the ses 6.7 $1k more than the firecrest? The nsw are just too rich for my take.
the 6.7’s are a bit deeper (60mmf/67mmr) vs the 404(58mm f&r) the Enve’s are also a slightly bit lighter at 1497g for the pair vs 1516g for the pair of 404’s. Me personally, I don’t see $1000 worth of value over the 404’s. I’ve got a set of the current 404FC’s and they are pretty darn good in all situations IMO.
yep, depth is different, but all the SES wheels are the same price so depth isn’t really factored into the 1k. 19g is something, but I’ve also seen the firecrests specced at 1470 grams, so I’ll take the weight as a bit of a wash. internal width of both is 23mm. Maybe the hubs are on two different tiers, but having a hard time seeing the value of the SES compared to the firecrests.
One of my biggest problems with the Enve line has been that the tire selection options feel very limited. Combined with the global parts shortage it just became a headache. Are other brands doing hookless road wheels with such restrictions?
I could never get the tubeless setup to work as well as everyone mentioned it should. Have set up many other wheelsets tubeless just fine, my Foundation 65s just refused to work well with compatible tires.
The list of compatible tires has expanded significantly recently…Iwould expect that to grow even more as more companies go hookless.
And yes, every hookless rim supplier has a list of approved tires for use with their wheels.
Isn’t the Firecrest the “cheap” Zipp wheel now? If so, you should be comparing to the Enve 45 or 65 (I think the rebranded what used to be called “Foundation” wheels)
The NSW would be the comparable wheel to the SES wheels price wise, right?