ENVE 3.4 – PERFORMANCE IS IN THE FRAME OF THE RIDER
After an initial scan of fellow tester Nate’s and my evaluation notes for the ENVE SES 3.4 wheelset, previously known as the SES 3.4 AR Disc but otherwise essentially unchanged, I couldn’t help but draw a parallel to the saying about how beauty is subjective, being in the eye of the beholder and all that.
Even though we’re both “road cycling enthusiasts,” he and I are very different riders. He’s among the fastest non-pro roadies, best climbers, most practical gearheads, and highly analytical people I know.
Me? Not so much. Average speed (18-20mph) and climbing ability. Home wrenching skills, etc., Very enthusiastic, though!
It’s actually kind of surprising when our evaluations reach similar conclusions about the performance characteristics of the gear we independently test. I always welcome his take and those of my fellow testers because they add breadth and depth to my own. Together, I hope we cover the range of vantage points and rider profiles of those of you who read our reviews.
When it came to the ENVE 3.4 wheelset, Nate didn’t care much for it. I liked most of what it had to offer.
Looking closer at our evaluations of this ENVE wheelset, it became clear to me that what set us apart was probably more about our different bike frames and riding profiles than our mental frames or subjective views of what makes for wheelset performance “beauty.”
I point this out rather than try to write some compromise of a review as these distinctions may also apply to what you would experience riding this wheelset.
The 3.4 doesn’t fit neatly into a single wheelset category. At about 40mm (39.5mm front, 43.5mm rear with my calipers), it’s close but not as deep as most all-around road disc wheels that go 45-50mm both front and back these days.
While it’s light (1432 grams with ENVE alloy hubs on my scale), the 3.4 is also not a dedicated climbing wheelset. ENVE has introduced the SES 2.3 for racers doing road races in the mountains. It’s a far narrower and shallower wheelset they claim weighs 200g less. There are certainly others making light, stiff carbon road disc wheels intended for your alpine climbing adventures.
What separates the SES 3.4 is its 25mm internal (25.0 measured) and 32mm external rim widths (actually 32.1 front and 32.5 rear). That, along with the similarly wide, deeper ENVE SES 4.5 (review here), makes it far wider than most road wheelsets being made these days that measure 19-21mm internal and 27-29mm external.
It is also as wide and often wider than most modern “gravel” wheels that range from 21mm to 25mm internal width.
So is it an all-around, climbing, and gravel wheelset triple-threat that’s great on all roads, as suggested by its original AR name? Or, is it the wheelset equivalent of a Swiss Army Knife, one that gets high marks for its versatility but doesn’t perform as well as those dedicated to either the all-around, climbing, or gravel mission?
Whether on paved or gravel roads, both Nate and I agreed the 3.4 is a laterally stiff wheelset. Yet, in Nate’s already very stiff Specialized Venge aero frame, this strength didn’t add any benefit. In my Parlee Altum, as quick and light as a road racing frame with the comfort of an endurance one, I enjoyed how the added stiffness of these wheels helped me accelerate uphill and start above-threshold intervals (or sprints for all you racers).
Mounted on my Giant Revolt Advanced carbon gravel frame, the SES 3.4’s stiffness was further apparent in the bike’s improved responsiveness compared to how it feels with most of the gravel alloy and carbon wheelsets I’ve been testing lately.
Vertical or radial stiffness, better known as compliance or comfort was a joy for me and a disappointment for Nate. With the latest model Schwalbe Pro One TLE 28C tires on the 3.4’s 25C wide rims, you’d think they’d soak up every imperfection on our New England paved roads.
Tire pressure is key to optimizing wheelset comfort on any set of rims. It’s hard for some to wrap their heads (and pumps) around how low you should inflate a wheelset as wide as the 3.4. I pumped it to the 48psi ENVE’s tire chart recommends for my combination of body weight (145lbs/66kg), the Schwalbe’s inflated tire width (29.0mm @60psi), and the 3.4’s 25mm internal width.
Yes, 48 psi. That’s not a misprint.
Nate, with his racer’s mindset, went about 8psi higher than his recommended level. (Details withheld to maintain the friendship.)
While the wheels soaked up large bumps and small potholes better than most, for me, they were also notably more comfortable on paved roads than narrower wheels, also run tubeless. For Nate, they were less comfortable than 19C and 21C carbon road disc wheelsets even though the 3.4s were inflated at least 10psi less than the level he pumps those to, also with tubeless tires.
Dirt and gravel road comfort is principally due to tire and inflation choices. So while I found them very comfortable at 30 psi on the trail, I can’t attribute it directly to the wheels.
The 3.4’s relative width and ability to absorb the bumps certainly created greater handling confidence that felt warranted cornering at speed on unevenly paved roads and when changing lines, with the right tires mounted, on gravel ones.
While even 21C road disc wheels are at their aerodynamic best on 25C tires, the ENVE SES 3.4 and 4.5 wheelsets are one of few truly designed (rather than marketed) for 28C tires. With the Schwalbe Pro One TLE pair inflated at 60psi (my measurement benchmark for 25C road wheelsets), the tires measured 29.0mm wide, making the rim width far wider than the actual tire width to minimize aero drag.
Note that the new Schwalbe Pro One TLE measures a size down from the prior generation (i.e., current generation 28Cs measure what last generation 25Cs did) and are as much as 1.0 to 1.5mm narrower than many older model 28C tires I’ve measured from other brands. So depending on the tires you use, you may find them measuring very near the width of the rim though not likely beyond the 3.4’s 32mm external rim width.
Either way, make sure you have about 38-40mm of room between your fork and chainstays for the 32mm wide rims and a 3-4mm buffer on either side of them for lateral deflection when cornering.
Also, be sure to use tires that are compatible with the hookless rim design that these wheels use (see list here). More tires are compatible now than when the also hookless, original 4.5 AR was introduced, and I believe most will before long as more road disc wheels go the hookless route.
All of that said, the 3.4 didn’t maintain momentum or otherwise feel particularly “aero” compared to better 50mm deep all-arounds and certainly not on par with still deeper aero wheelsets. On the plus side, it did feel a bit more sustained going forward than other wheelsets in the 35-40mm range. Also, the weeks of 10-20mph crosswinds we experienced during our spring testing rides didn’t affect this wheelset one bit.
The hubs ran smoothly with an average freewheeling sound from the ENVE alloy hubs that use Mavic Instant Drive 360 ratchet internals.
Aerodynamics also plays a role in climbing, once considered only a battle of grams. For Nate, a very accomplished climber using a very aero frame, he felt no difference on steep, 2-4 minute climbs between the light ENVE disc wheelset and his roughly 25mm deeper, 200g heavier Roval CLX 64 aero wheels. On punchy climbs less than 30 seconds long, the aero wheels seemed quicker for him, perhaps due to the aero benefit he carried into those climbs.
For me, an average climber who goes uphill far slower than Nate, I had the sensation of ascending freely on the 3.4 wheels, limited only by my strength and fitness. From experience, I know that most 1600+ gram aero wheels hold me back, their weight perhaps overwhelming any potential aero benefit.
Going downhill, the width of the SES 3.4 rim and tire combination made for a worry-free joy ride, the kind you feel on a rollercoaster knowing (or at least believing) the cart you are in is securely riding on rails.
Climbing dirt and gravel where speeds are far less than on paved roads, the 3.4 wheelset’s combination of light weight and stiffness provided the feeling of turbo-boost responsiveness.
Clearly, the ENVE 3.4 disc is a very versatile wheelset. If you ride both paved and gravel surfaces and do a lot of climbing, this one wheelset which lists for $2850, £3300, €4000 can serve you well and save you from buying one for paved and another for dirt and gravel roads.
But, if you spend most of your time riding on paved roads and at aero speeds and your mental and, perhaps, physical frames are more biased to aero performance than climbing, the SES 4.5 would be a better choice.
You can get the 3.4 at the best prices from stores I recommend for their low price and high customer satisfaction ratings by clicking these links directly to this wheelset’s page at Competitive Cyclist, BTD (BikeTiresDirect), Merlin, and Sigma Sports.
In The Know Cycling is ad-free, subscription-free, and reader-supported. If you want to help keep it rolling without any added cost to you, buy your gear and kit after clicking the store links on the site. When you do, we may earn an affiliate commission that will help me cover the expenses to create and publish our independent, comprehensive, and comparative reviews. Thank you, Steve. Learn more.
Hi Steve! Been waiting on this one for a while, sounds about what I expected, glad I still have my 4.5ARs thanks to your reviews. With that said all I really want to know at this point is how these compare to the Bontrager Aeolus Pro 3V at half the price. Me thinks those Bontrager Will be the far better value of not even better performer. Anyhoo, please tell me that review is in the near future horizon! Thanks and keep up the great work!
That review (and more) is in the near future horizon…
Are 3.4ARs lighter than 3.4 disc wheels? If so, why would anyone pick the regular 3.4s over the 3.4ARs, aside from the AR tubeless tire requirements?
Tommy, if the only thing that differentiates wheelsets is weight, yes, why ride anything but the lightest wheelset? But there are many other factors far more important than weight to wheelset performance that should be central to choosing between them and between the 3.4 and 3.4AR. Steve
Just bought SES 3.4 AR and I’m utterly disappointed by finish quality…scuff marks like someone run sand paper over rims. White lines on sides of rims. Center line where spokes connects with rim have raw white line running along. Like 2 sides of rims where glued together and connection shows.
Spoke tension is bad. Wheel is almost true but when you inflate tire wheel becomes unbalanced.
I have complained to ENVE. We’ll see what they do.
What did ENVE end up saying?
Hi Robert, I have the same facts with my Enve Ses 3.4 AR and I am not able to use them tubeless. The valve does not close with the rim because there is a small ring on the opening where the nut should lock. White lines on the sides (my dealer said that is normal for Enve because they do not varnish the rims after laminating) and the line in the middle as you described.
Did you get an answer from Enve?
Many thanks and best regards, Stefan
Hey Steve,
I’m looking to upgrade the wheels that I’m currently running on my Trek Emonda SLR 2020 Disc. I’m looking for a wheelset that offers the versatility to be ridden on-road but also on gravel too. I have a set of Enve SES 3.4 on my Parlee Altum which I have been very impressed with in terms of ride quality, so I was looking primarily at Enve as an upgrade but am open to suggestion.
Couple of questions:
1. Would the Enve SES 3.4 AR be compatible with a road frame (i.e., Trek Emonda SLR)?
2. Do you think these wheels would be a good choice given that I’m more focussed on climbing than straight-line speed and given I want something with the versatility to be ridden on asphalt as well as over rough roads / gravel? If you don’t think the Enve SES 3.4 AR is the best choice can you suggest a different wheelset?
3. Given the number of horror stories I’ve heard / read about riding tubeless, I think I would want to run these wheels with tubes. Does that completely defeat the object? If so, is there another wheelset that you’d suggest that would be better suited to running with tubes given I want to use them for road and gravel?
Thanks
Ben
Ben, 1) No, Trek recommends the Emonda use a tire no wider than 28c/28mm. The 3.4 AR’s external rim width is 32mm. You’d need a bike that allows for wider wheels and tires to accomplish both road and offroad riding like you’ve described, 2) On a bike that allows for the wheel and tire width that you might ride on gravel (40mm or so), the ENVE 3.4 AR is the best performer I’ve ridden so far for what you are describing, 3) Yes, using a wheelset for on and offroad with clincher tires does defeat the performance and comfort benefits you’ll get from any wheelset intended for both surfaces. The horror stories are mostly about setting up tubeless rather than riding them. If you pick the right tires, you’ll be able to set up tubeless without horror. Also, if you plan to ride on rough roads and gravel, you definitely want to ride tubeless otherwise you’ll be flatting a lot or have to ride at higher pressures than comfortable just to avoid pinch flats. I’ve posted reviews recently on the realities of tubeless road tires, the best tubeless road tires, and the best gravel tires that you might want to check out. They’re here: https://intheknowcycling.com/category/tires/. Steve
Steve, thanks for the rapid and detailed response.
Hi Steve,
I’m looking for a light and snappy wheelset for mostly climbing as I live on the foot of a steep hill (avg 7% with short 10-11% portions) but do on occasion ride on the flats (avg 30-32 km/h). Although I don’t ride much gravel, I would like to run 28c tires (lots of bad asphalt here) and this, combined with extra comfort and looking to future proof, is pointing me to the 3.4 AR instead of the regular 3.4 disc.
On the other hand, I’m not crazy about the limited tire compatibility with the AR, especially given that clearance will already be tight on my Tarmac SL6. Also, it seems that some sort of standard for tubeless tire and rim fitting is in the works. Does it make sense to purchase the ARs now when the road tubeless industry is still in such flux? Any chance these could be soon outdated when a new standard is established?
There would be some aero loss on the flats with 28c tires on the regular 3.4 disc but at least I’d have my choice of tubes vs tubeless (haven’t switched to TL yet) and no restrictions on tubeless tires given the hooked rims.
Thanks
Grant, About the only good climbing disc wheelset that you can run 28mm tires on without committing aero suicide is the 3.4AR. While Contis aren’t recommended on hookless rims, there are plenty of good tires that do. Further, there’s nothing in the works I’m aware of that is all of sudden (or in a couple years) make all tubeless tires compatible with all rims. I wrote more about what’s happening in my recent tubeless tire reviews and reality check (rim’s bead lock diameter and tire’s bead diameter getting better aligned and tighter tolerances on 622 diameter tires through ETRTO revisions) but things won’t change on a dime and some won’t change at all. If you are still more comfortable with clinchers or want to have a choice, check out my review of climbing disc wheelset including the Bontrager RSL 37. Not an off road wheel (nor is the 3.4 disc) but really quick going uphill. Read it here. Steve
Thanks Steve. Since frame clearance will be tight with the AR rims on the Tarmac, would the Zipp tubeless tires being the widest make matters worse? If so, which tires do you prefer for the ARs between the Schwalbe Pro One and the Specialized Rapidair (aero considerations aside as wheels are mostly for climbing)? I noticed in your tubeless tire chart that you didn’t have comments on puncture resistance for the Rapidairs.
Grant. All 3 tires are narrower than the rim so that wouldn’t be an issue. I’d go with the Zipp. While no puncture issues with the RapidAir tires, they were a b*tch to get off the 3.4 AR. And the Schwalbe Pro One did cut when we took them on crappy roads. Steve
Hi Steve, I would appreciate your thoughts on the new Foundation series from ENVE; especially the Enve 45. Are you planning to review that wheel set? Thank you for the comprehensive reviews. I appreciate it immensely.
Hi Stephen, We’re testing out the ENVE 65 now and will post the review in October. I’m still working on getting the ENVE 45 (and Zipp 303 Firecrest) in for testing. Steve
Thanks! I am looking forward to reading the review!
Hi Steve,
First off thanks for the great site I’ve followed many of your recommendations with great results!
You mentioned these wheels for gravel use and I see many of riders using deep aero rims on the gravel. Is there a point at which the tires get too wide (ex: 40-45mm) and essentially negate any aero benefit and instead you should just focus on lighter wheels of proper internal width but forget the aero profile?
Daryle, On dirt and gravel surfaces, to flip the phrase, aero is nothing. Other than on a hard pack dirt roads or the paved roads between gravel sections, you aren’t going fast enough to get any aero benefit. And with the tires wider than the rims, you wouldn’t get any aero benefit even when you are going fast enough (>20mph). Gravel bikes are more upright and so is your body. The most effective way to get more aero performance on aero sections is to bring your upper body into an aero position.
It may just be that the riders you see with the deeper rims on gravel are using their road bike wheels. But if you’re buying a wheelset for gravel, whether you plan to use it on the road or not, you should always focus on getting light rims with 23-25mm internal widths. If you plan to ride on both gravel and the road, the extra depth, as with the 4.5 AR gives you an aero bonus on paved roads and yet is still wide enough for great comfort and handling with wider, gravel tires. The 3.4 AR is a great combination of a climbing road wheelset and wide, light gravel wheelset. Steve
Hi Steve, I was originally gonna pull the trigger on the Bontrager Aeolus Pro 37 based on your great review, but my local shop won’t be able to get it in for a bit. Anyway with all the waiting, I decided to splurge on something nicer. If you had to choose, would you get these or the Zipp 303 Firecrest? I am a go anywhere person. Not a great climber, but where I live, there are a ton of hills, and I do a fair bit of hill repeats as part of my training program. I also do quite a bit of gravel. I like that the Enves are lightweight, stiff and wide, but they are used so I’m not sure about warranty etc. For the same price I can get the 303 Firecrest new, so am mulling over what to do. Looks wise, the Firecrest are def. a beaut. Appreciate your reviews and any feedback you may have. Thanks.
Nic, I review and compare the ENVE 3.4 AR and Firecrest in this review. Steve
Hi I am struggling between ENVE 3.4 and ENVE 3.4 AR. I have a giant revolt 2019 0. My proportion of Gravel/Road is 30/70. I will be running Revolt is already compliant in comparison to their defy series. My question is am i better of getting the non AR version? I will be running tires from 30 to 32 TL setup. Appreciate it
Kamran, Riding 30-32mm tires on a wider rim will give the tires a better profile for handling, all else being equal and regardless of your gravel/road mix. For that reason alone, I’d suggest the 3.4 AR. Cheers, Steve
Thanks for the review! Been building up a Surly Midnight Special as an alternate bike for training rides and something as equally good for gravel. Love my FFWD-F4D’s for my road bike and thought I wanted something similar but couldn’t decide on the depth. Thanks to your review I just pulled the trigger on some 3.4 AR’s. Seems like they’re exactly what I’m looking for 🙂