enve 3.4 disc clincher vs zipp 404 clincher
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 110
Bikes: Santana Team AL Tandem
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
enve 3.4 disc clincher vs zipp 404 clincher
i am getting a new calfee tandem built up with trp thru-axle fork and WI cld thru-axle hubs (front and rear). it will have 180mm disc on front, 203 mm disc on back, and will have the new shimano hydraulic brakes.
i am considering 2 potential wheelsets - the enve 3.4 disc clincher wheelset (made specifically for disc brakes) and the zipp 404 wheelset. i talked to enve today, and even though the enve 3.4 disc clincher wheelset is only 24 spokes (front and rear), the person i talked to thought it would be plenty strong for a tandem with hydraulic disc brakes (with the WI hubs with 3x lacing). he said the enve 3.4 disc clincher was lighter than normal enve 3.4 due to taking out the brake track, and they also made it stronger for disc brake application.
but, the enve 3.4 rims are only 35mm depth in front and 45mm depth in rear, compared to the zipp 404 depth of 58mm front and rear (with similar rim width and shape). but, the zipp 404s are not disc specific, and they have the brake track, so are presumably heavier and maybe not as strong.
what are thoughts on the best wheelset? i would preferably want something that is as aero as possible, as wide as possible (for 28mm tires), and sufficiently strong for the application.
thoughts on pros/cons of each wheelset?
i am considering 2 potential wheelsets - the enve 3.4 disc clincher wheelset (made specifically for disc brakes) and the zipp 404 wheelset. i talked to enve today, and even though the enve 3.4 disc clincher wheelset is only 24 spokes (front and rear), the person i talked to thought it would be plenty strong for a tandem with hydraulic disc brakes (with the WI hubs with 3x lacing). he said the enve 3.4 disc clincher was lighter than normal enve 3.4 due to taking out the brake track, and they also made it stronger for disc brake application.
but, the enve 3.4 rims are only 35mm depth in front and 45mm depth in rear, compared to the zipp 404 depth of 58mm front and rear (with similar rim width and shape). but, the zipp 404s are not disc specific, and they have the brake track, so are presumably heavier and maybe not as strong.
what are thoughts on the best wheelset? i would preferably want something that is as aero as possible, as wide as possible (for 28mm tires), and sufficiently strong for the application.
thoughts on pros/cons of each wheelset?
#2
Senior Member
Quick questions:
How did you narrow your ENVE choice to the 3.4?
Why eliminate the SES 4.5 or 6.7 if you want a thicker rim?
Why eliminate the mountain or XC rims as they are lighter, have the more hole counts, and fit wider tires?
Just want to pick your brain on your decision process.
Thanks,
CJ
How did you narrow your ENVE choice to the 3.4?
Why eliminate the SES 4.5 or 6.7 if you want a thicker rim?
Why eliminate the mountain or XC rims as they are lighter, have the more hole counts, and fit wider tires?
Just want to pick your brain on your decision process.
Thanks,
CJ
#3
Clipless in Coeur d'Alene
i talked to enve today, and even though the enve 3.4 disc clincher wheelset is only 24 spokes (front and rear), the person i talked to thought it would be plenty strong for a tandem with hydraulic disc brakes (with the WI hubs with 3x lacing). he said the enve 3.4 disc clincher was lighter than normal enve 3.4 due to taking out the brake track, and they also made it stronger for disc brake application.
#4
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 110
Bikes: Santana Team AL Tandem
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Quick questions:
How did you narrow your ENVE choice to the 3.4?
Why eliminate the SES 4.5 or 6.7 if you want a thicker rim?
Why eliminate the mountain or XC rims as they are lighter, have the more hole counts, and fit wider tires?
Just want to pick your brain on your decision process.
Thanks,
CJ
How did you narrow your ENVE choice to the 3.4?
Why eliminate the SES 4.5 or 6.7 if you want a thicker rim?
Why eliminate the mountain or XC rims as they are lighter, have the more hole counts, and fit wider tires?
Just want to pick your brain on your decision process.
Thanks,
CJ
others have said that 28 spokes minimum are needed for tandems with disc brakes. from talking to the guy at enve, he thought the enve 3.4 disc clincher rims (with only 24 spokes front and rear) would be strong enough for tandems with disc brakes. they are stronger and the layup is different from the standard enve 3.4, enve 4.5, and enve 6.7.
i think the XC rims would also work, but i think they are even less deep (and less aero) than the enve 3.4 rims.
#6
Tandem Vincitur
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern California
Posts: 3,317
Bikes: BMC Pro Machine SLC01, Specialized Globe, Burley Rock 'N Roll tandem, Calfee Dragonfly tandem.
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
You talked to ENVE, about tandem rims, and they were helpful.
What if you talk to Zipp?
They may just recoil from you like Dracula from the cross, as soon as you mention the word tandem.
If ENVE shows tandem love, while Zipp's countenance is cool disdain, if you are on fence, why go with Zipp?
What if you talk to Zipp?
They may just recoil from you like Dracula from the cross, as soon as you mention the word tandem.
What are the recommended rider weight limits for Zipp wheels?
Zipp’s rider weight guidelines vary for different wheels. To find out the recommended maximum weight for a specific wheel, please click on the “Specs” tab on that wheel’s product information page.
Note: Zipp wheels, rims, and hubs are NOT warranted for use on tandem bikes carts or buggies.
When under warranty, my rear ENVE rim delaminated after a blow out, ENVE cheerfully replaced rims and rebuilt both wheels.Zipp’s rider weight guidelines vary for different wheels. To find out the recommended maximum weight for a specific wheel, please click on the “Specs” tab on that wheel’s product information page.
Note: Zipp wheels, rims, and hubs are NOT warranted for use on tandem bikes carts or buggies.
If ENVE shows tandem love, while Zipp's countenance is cool disdain, if you are on fence, why go with Zipp?
#7
Newbie
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: PacNW
Posts: 32
Bikes: See user name...
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I went with the XC rims option for one reason mostly: They are 30 mm wide and I chose greater tire volume over a marginal aero benefit. A 28 mmm tire doesn't bulge outside of the rim at all. We all remember when a 30 mm rim was considered deep.
Bradcycles, you are in Portland. I bought my wheels from Cyclepath on MLK. They import a hooked all-mountain 29er rim that is 30mm outside width (25 mm interior) that you can get in a variety of hole drillings and they are $280 per rim. You can get two sets for the price of that Enve set.
#8
Clipless in Coeur d'Alene
Depth adds rim strength, but while this is a major factor it is not the only one. When reducing spoke count, matching with deeper rims will reduce spoke length which adds strength. Review the ERDs of each rim and note how the difference in rim depth x 2 closely mirrors the ERD. For example, the 3.4 35mm rim ERD is 2cm larger than the 45mm rim. The 6.7 60mm rim ERD is another 3cm smaller (total of 5cm smaller) inside. It should be clear that longer spokes will not build as stiff a wheel.
The accepted standard trend I have observed is for disc 29er wheels to be 24 spokes, where their non-disc counterparts are built with 20. That is for single bikes, one rider, sub-230lbs. For a dual horse tandem, build what they call a clydesdale setup for singles.
Don't bet the farm and buy the farm. Be safe my friend.
The accepted standard trend I have observed is for disc 29er wheels to be 24 spokes, where their non-disc counterparts are built with 20. That is for single bikes, one rider, sub-230lbs. For a dual horse tandem, build what they call a clydesdale setup for singles.
Don't bet the farm and buy the farm. Be safe my friend.
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Anchorage, Ak
Posts: 620
Bikes: 2015 Calfee Tetra tandem,2016 Calfee Tetra Adventure Tandem, Ventana ECDM 26 mtn tandem, Ventana ECDM 29r full suspension Mtn tandem ,Ventana Fat tire tandem, Calfee Dragon Fly, Santa Cruz Carbon 5010, 907 Whiteout fat tire
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
6 Posts
Quick questions:
How did you narrow your ENVE choice to the 3.4?
Why eliminate the SES 4.5 or 6.7 if you want a thicker rim?
Why eliminate the mountain or XC rims as they are lighter, have the more hole counts, and fit wider tires?
Just want to pick your brain on your decision process.
Thanks,
CJ
How did you narrow your ENVE choice to the 3.4?
Why eliminate the SES 4.5 or 6.7 if you want a thicker rim?
Why eliminate the mountain or XC rims as they are lighter, have the more hole counts, and fit wider tires?
Just want to pick your brain on your decision process.
Thanks,
CJ
#10
Senior Member
AK,
The ENVE XC spec 100lb max pressure with a 28mm wheel and 50lb with a 1.9in wheel. I understand they are not aero/deep enough for the Brad's need. What is your opinion on how lower pressure larger tires affect road tandem handling?
Brad,
Does Zipp make disc specific 404 rims? If you eliminate the 6.7 for having a brake track, why consider the Zipp?
The ENVE XC spec 100lb max pressure with a 28mm wheel and 50lb with a 1.9in wheel. I understand they are not aero/deep enough for the Brad's need. What is your opinion on how lower pressure larger tires affect road tandem handling?
Brad,
Does Zipp make disc specific 404 rims? If you eliminate the 6.7 for having a brake track, why consider the Zipp?
Last edited by chojn1; 04-09-15 at 06:09 AM.
#11
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 110
Bikes: Santana Team AL Tandem
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
The zipp 404 rims are not disc specific, but they do have 28 spokes. I also understand pther tandem riders have successfully used these tims with disc brakes.
I would prefer the enve 6.7 wheels if i got assurance that they would be strong enough for a tandem with hydraulic disc brakes.
#13
Clipless in Coeur d'Alene
... and so which component resides between a disc hub and rim? Spokes. If ENVE had to make specific allowances to strengthen the rim for disc usage, why assume a similar allowance is not needed for spokes?
#14
Senior Member
My perception is that disc brakes put a greater load on the spokes than rim brakes, therefore more/stronger spokes would be required for a disc brake setup.
#15
Senior Member
With your choices the Enve wheels sound like the best choice. Ritterview has had excellent results with his! If ENVE will provide warranty on a tandem and Zipp will not then for me the choice would be made. Since I do not use nor need disc brakes I use HED 3 wheels and do not have to worry about conventional spokes and wheel truing.
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ft Worth, TX
Posts: 1,971
Bikes: Custom 650B tandem by Bob Brown, 650B tandem converted from Santana Arriva, Santana Noventa, Boulder Bicycle 700C, Gunnar Sport
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
4 Posts
AK,
The ENVE XC spec 100lb max pressure with a 28mm wheel and 50lb with a 1.9in wheel. I understand they are not aero/deep enough for the Brad's need. What is your opinion on how lower pressure larger tires affect road tandem handling?
Brad,
Does Zipp make disc specific 404 rims? If you eliminate the 6.7 for having a brake track, why consider the Zipp?
The ENVE XC spec 100lb max pressure with a 28mm wheel and 50lb with a 1.9in wheel. I understand they are not aero/deep enough for the Brad's need. What is your opinion on how lower pressure larger tires affect road tandem handling?
Brad,
Does Zipp make disc specific 404 rims? If you eliminate the 6.7 for having a brake track, why consider the Zipp?
Good info and illustrates wider tires pressure on rim walls.
What pressure do you run on your Hetre's?
#17
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Vacaville, CA
Posts: 556
Bikes: Co-Motion Speedster Tandem, S-works 29r, Specialized Tarmac SL4
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I'm curious as to why everyone feels it's acceptable to run 180mm front discs and 203mm rears? With the majority of the braking happening with the front wheel - I can't see why anyone would do this from a braking improvement perspective. I guess if you are a really light team it possibly could make sense. Is it simply because of the fork choice?
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Anchorage, Ak
Posts: 620
Bikes: 2015 Calfee Tetra tandem,2016 Calfee Tetra Adventure Tandem, Ventana ECDM 26 mtn tandem, Ventana ECDM 29r full suspension Mtn tandem ,Ventana Fat tire tandem, Calfee Dragon Fly, Santa Cruz Carbon 5010, 907 Whiteout fat tire
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
6 Posts
I'm curious as to why everyone feels it's acceptable to run 180mm front discs and 203mm rears? With the majority of the braking happening with the front wheel - I can't see why anyone would do this from a braking improvement perspective. I guess if you are a really light team it possibly could make sense. Is it simply because of the fork choice?
#19
Senior Member
i am getting a new calfee tandem built up with trp thru-axle fork and WI cld thru-axle hubs (front and rear). it will have 180mm disc on front, 203 mm disc on back, and will have the new shimano hydraulic brakes.
i am considering 2 potential wheelsets - the enve 3.4 disc clincher wheelset (made specifically for disc brakes) and the zipp 404 wheelset. i talked to enve today, and even though the enve 3.4 disc clincher wheelset is only 24 spokes (front and rear), the person i talked to thought it would be plenty strong for a tandem with hydraulic disc brakes (with the WI hubs with 3x lacing). he said the enve 3.4 disc clincher was lighter than normal enve 3.4 due to taking out the brake track, and they also made it stronger for disc brake application.
but, the enve 3.4 rims are only 35mm depth in front and 45mm depth in rear, compared to the zipp 404 depth of 58mm front and rear (with similar rim width and shape). but, the zipp 404s are not disc specific, and they have the brake track, so are presumably heavier and maybe not as strong.
what are thoughts on the best wheelset? i would preferably want something that is as aero as possible, as wide as possible (for 28mm tires), and sufficiently strong for the application.
thoughts on pros/cons of each wheelset?
i am considering 2 potential wheelsets - the enve 3.4 disc clincher wheelset (made specifically for disc brakes) and the zipp 404 wheelset. i talked to enve today, and even though the enve 3.4 disc clincher wheelset is only 24 spokes (front and rear), the person i talked to thought it would be plenty strong for a tandem with hydraulic disc brakes (with the WI hubs with 3x lacing). he said the enve 3.4 disc clincher was lighter than normal enve 3.4 due to taking out the brake track, and they also made it stronger for disc brake application.
but, the enve 3.4 rims are only 35mm depth in front and 45mm depth in rear, compared to the zipp 404 depth of 58mm front and rear (with similar rim width and shape). but, the zipp 404s are not disc specific, and they have the brake track, so are presumably heavier and maybe not as strong.
what are thoughts on the best wheelset? i would preferably want something that is as aero as possible, as wide as possible (for 28mm tires), and sufficiently strong for the application.
thoughts on pros/cons of each wheelset?
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Vacaville, CA
Posts: 556
Bikes: Co-Motion Speedster Tandem, S-works 29r, Specialized Tarmac SL4
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Because of fork choices there are very few carbon forks disc brake ready and then even fewer with a thru axle. The Whisky fork only has room for a 180mm rotor. The hydraulic brakes are significantly improved in modulation and power so the 180 is IMHO more powerful then a rim brake. I appreciate your thoughts about the front wheel doing most of the brakes however on a tandem I think is a bit more even between the front and rear. I would love to have a 203 in front also but it is really all about the fork choices.
I've been through this on two race cars. Ultimately - I had to go to bigger rotors (in the front only) to get the braking I needed - because I was getting caliper temps way above what they could handle. Yes - know its not a bike but the same theories apply.
#21
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 110
Bikes: Santana Team AL Tandem
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
a significant aerodynamic advantage with the zipp 404 (less so with the enve 3.4 wheels). of all the parts and bikes i've ever purchased in riding road bikes the last 15 years, the biggest performance gain i felt of any single part or bike was when i purchased my enve 6.7 clincher wheels. i could tell that i was faster any time i was pushing the pace in the wind. i have the enve 3.4 clincher wheels on another road bike, and i can tell the aero advantage is not as significant with those wheels.
#22
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ft Worth, TX
Posts: 1,971
Bikes: Custom 650B tandem by Bob Brown, 650B tandem converted from Santana Arriva, Santana Noventa, Boulder Bicycle 700C, Gunnar Sport
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
4 Posts
Yesterday we were doing some intervals on a route that runs out and back north and south. A common 20++ mph south wind was blowing so we used the upwind leg for the interval and the downwind for recovery. On the third trip into the wind I was gassed and struggling but looked at the computer to see it was our fastest leg by at least 1.5 mph.
After the ride I congratulated my stoker for really putting out the power on that last trip and she replied that she went just as hard on previous intervals but that was the trip that she stayed in the drops the entire way.
#23
Senior Member
a significant aerodynamic advantage with the zipp 404 (less so with the enve 3.4 wheels). of all the parts and bikes i've ever purchased in riding road bikes the last 15 years, the biggest performance gain i felt of any single part or bike was when i purchased my enve 6.7 clincher wheels. i could tell that i was faster any time i was pushing the pace in the wind. i have the enve 3.4 clincher wheels on another road bike, and i can tell the aero advantage is not as significant with those wheels.
Yesterday I actually tried to test some of my bikes to see if I could measure any aero advantage. This was around a velodrome. 20 laps/9km with each bike. Not too fast just a pace I could hold steady.
1- 34.9kph @ 232w. Giant TCR with Zipp 404s.
2- 35.8kph @ 231w. Giant Propel (aero frame) with Zipp 404s
But then,
3- 35.7kph @ 232w. Old Pinarello Dogma FPX with shallow box section alloy rims (Campag Nucleon).
The point is this aero stuff can be confusing and I think some of the differences are not as great as what the marketing people would tell you and what you may "feel".
#24
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 110
Bikes: Santana Team AL Tandem
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
on a tandem, i think the aero effect would be even more significant. due to a 70% increase in my power on the flats relative to riding by myself, we are able to maintain higher speeds on the flats than i can by myself, so the aero advantage is enhanced. when my stoker and i were in peak shape, we showed up to a local fast noon ride that went over rolling and flat terrain, and by halfway through the ride, by riding at the front, we had burned off 13 of the 15 people on the ride (all of them were on single bikes). and, this was on our tandem with non-aero wheels. if we had the aero wheels, we would have been even faster on the flat and rolling terrain.
#25
Senior Member
I am running Babyshoe extra light at 45lb per square inch.