Enve 4.5AR Disc & 5.6 Disc - Feedback
09-21-20, 07:26 AM
#1
V8, Big Block
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
3 Posts
Enve 4.5AR Disc & 5.6 Disc - Feedback
I was torn between which of the two, Enve 4.5AR or 5.6 Disc, to buy so I bought both and thought I'd post this in case it's useful for someone else.
My riding / setup:
Domane SLR 60 / 185 lb / 6'2"
Lots of solo training, some group rides, centuries, fondos, occasional triathlon
Terrain:
NW Arkansas, nearly always paved roads. Little is perfect smooth asphalt; however, it's also not very coarse chip-and-seal like I've ran into in some Texas events. In terms of smoothness/quality, 10 being fresh asphalt that barely makes a sound and 1 is pot-holed and big chip-and-seal, I'd say 6-7.
Summary: I liked the 5.6 Disc better.
I called Enve a few times before buying. They said the 5.6 would give "a little" benefit over the 4.5ARs but not a ton. Also said most of their own factory workers ride the 4.5ARs locally in Utah. So I bought the 4.5s with Enve Alloy.
With IRC RBCC Formula Pro tires (28mm) the 4.5ARs were very comfortable and extremely stable in tight turns. I rode them 1600 miles in a few months with no flats in a tubeless setup despite visible glass/trash on a few of my routes from time to time. I am pretty tuned into what speeds I should be getting given a section on one of my normal routes at a given wattage. The 4.5ARs were certainly fast but I knew I was losing something at the top-end based on the numbers. Even using Reynolds 58/62X/25mm GP5000II had me going faster at the same watts.
Bought the 5.6 Disc with Enve Ally and GP5000TL 25mms and have rode them about 1000 miles. Even though the specs are very close, they feel noticeably lighter to me. I also notice, at the same watts, I'm about 0.8-1.1 mph faster on average over long (50 mile) stretches. While I would give the comfort award to the 4.5ARs, the 5.6s are not at all harsh and I actually like the less muted feel and greater road feedback of the 5.6. Looking at the specs of the wheels I would not think the speed would be that much faster. Weight (4.5 vs 5.6): 1569 / 1553. Front Depth: 49/54. Rear Depth: 55/63. Ext Width: 30.5 & 31 / 29 & 29. Finally, I swear I climb better with the 5.6s, but I think that may be in my head as the wheel specs would suggest I likely wouldn't feel anything different.
All in all, I may put the 4.5ARs on new gravel bike planned for later this year. However, the gravel around here, while copious in volume, is not benign country lanes where something like a 4.5AR would shine at higher speeds. Instead, it's blade-graded rock that sheers off, is far from smooth, and needs around a 40mm tire. The 40mm need puts it out of the optimal realm of the 4.5s... Something like a G23 may be wiser... Gravel is my least favorite of road, mountain, and gravel riding so I don't have a ton of knowledge on the subject... May just sell the 4.5AR / would be a good setup for many looking for max comfort on average to poor road conditions. For me, the 5.6s fit the overall bill better.
Hope that helps someone in a similar situation....
My riding / setup:
Domane SLR 60 / 185 lb / 6'2"
Lots of solo training, some group rides, centuries, fondos, occasional triathlon
Terrain:
NW Arkansas, nearly always paved roads. Little is perfect smooth asphalt; however, it's also not very coarse chip-and-seal like I've ran into in some Texas events. In terms of smoothness/quality, 10 being fresh asphalt that barely makes a sound and 1 is pot-holed and big chip-and-seal, I'd say 6-7.
Summary: I liked the 5.6 Disc better.
I called Enve a few times before buying. They said the 5.6 would give "a little" benefit over the 4.5ARs but not a ton. Also said most of their own factory workers ride the 4.5ARs locally in Utah. So I bought the 4.5s with Enve Alloy.
With IRC RBCC Formula Pro tires (28mm) the 4.5ARs were very comfortable and extremely stable in tight turns. I rode them 1600 miles in a few months with no flats in a tubeless setup despite visible glass/trash on a few of my routes from time to time. I am pretty tuned into what speeds I should be getting given a section on one of my normal routes at a given wattage. The 4.5ARs were certainly fast but I knew I was losing something at the top-end based on the numbers. Even using Reynolds 58/62X/25mm GP5000II had me going faster at the same watts.
Bought the 5.6 Disc with Enve Ally and GP5000TL 25mms and have rode them about 1000 miles. Even though the specs are very close, they feel noticeably lighter to me. I also notice, at the same watts, I'm about 0.8-1.1 mph faster on average over long (50 mile) stretches. While I would give the comfort award to the 4.5ARs, the 5.6s are not at all harsh and I actually like the less muted feel and greater road feedback of the 5.6. Looking at the specs of the wheels I would not think the speed would be that much faster. Weight (4.5 vs 5.6): 1569 / 1553. Front Depth: 49/54. Rear Depth: 55/63. Ext Width: 30.5 & 31 / 29 & 29. Finally, I swear I climb better with the 5.6s, but I think that may be in my head as the wheel specs would suggest I likely wouldn't feel anything different.
All in all, I may put the 4.5ARs on new gravel bike planned for later this year. However, the gravel around here, while copious in volume, is not benign country lanes where something like a 4.5AR would shine at higher speeds. Instead, it's blade-graded rock that sheers off, is far from smooth, and needs around a 40mm tire. The 40mm need puts it out of the optimal realm of the 4.5s... Something like a G23 may be wiser... Gravel is my least favorite of road, mountain, and gravel riding so I don't have a ton of knowledge on the subject... May just sell the 4.5AR / would be a good setup for many looking for max comfort on average to poor road conditions. For me, the 5.6s fit the overall bill better.
Hope that helps someone in a similar situation....
09-22-20, 11:13 AM
#2
Senior Member
G23 would indeed be better, according to enve, running tires that are wider than the rim makes the rim as aero as a box section, so you are just carrying extra rotational weight without the benefits
