I've tried the Rail as well.

Given the above, I'd echo what other posters have said and lean towards the 6.7's. Having ridden these wheels almost exclusively in training over the past 2 years, I can confidently attest to their durability. In terms of whether the 6.7's would be "too much" for a road bike... not in my opinion. I spent a few weeks riding the 8.9's on the road bike and didn't find them to be overkill. However, for the road bike, my first choice would be the 6.7's for their versatility across different terrain.

---

VALÄ’RE | YouTube

You can find aero data here : http://www.aeroweenie.com/data.html and here http://www.cyclingpowerlab.com/...entAerodynamics.aspx

I compiled all of the data in one sheet and have posted some comparisons here but folks freak out about different tunnels on different days so the data is invalid in their eyes. Take from it what you will but the testing protocols are very similar, as are some of the results.

Echoing everyone else, go with what works for you, your budget and other intangibles.

I'd say go with other hubs rather than the Chris kings. They're pretty and good hubs, but WAY overpriced . White industries T11 are nice, much cheaper, and solid hubs.

GREAT looking rig.

Are those 8.9's on that bike? Only thing I think about that is that I already own some zipp 808's...

I've ridden Firecrest 404/808 and ENVE 6.7's and I couldn't tell a difference at all. If you want to pay more for ENVEs, than that's up to you. The molded spoke holes are nicer instead of the drilled ones Zipp does but other than that, I couldn't find any reason to buy ENVE's over Zipps. The ENVE warranty may be a selling point to most people

---

Make Inside Out Sports your next online tri shop! http://www.insideoutsports.com/

I been riding the ENVE SES 6.7 clinchers w/G3 PT, significantly better than my Zipp 404 clinchers.

---

"if you chose it, it's not really pain"

I have a pair of SES 6.7s (CC) as well as 404s tubulars (non-firecrest). From a crosswind stability point of view, I find both wheel sets approximately even. Bear in mind the Enves are on my road bike and the Zipps on my TT... Both sets feel very solid despite the punishment they take riding on/in/around NYC streets....On a purely subjective basis, I think that the Zipps "feel" marginally quicker, but this is probably a function of the gearing on my TT bike/aero/positioning, etc.. The SESs accelerate and climb "quicker", but again, probably because they are on my R5.. Just my $0.02...

It might help to know how heavy you are, typical terrain you race on, and how comfortable you find the 808's you ride.

The 3.4's are very fast all around wheels and would be good for everything. They'd also give you more versatility given that you have 808's: on a windy race day, you could go 808 rear and the "3" up front (yes, they wouldn't match, but it'd be a great set up). As example: many racers use a "3" front and the "9" rear from an 8.9 set.

The 6.7's are great wheels too. I think it's really a matter of you feeling comfortable controlling the deeper front wheel in windy conditions or fast descents.

I am 180 lbs and looking at this set primarily for road bike (54 specialized venge a-works) but there may be some instances where they are on my tri bike (2011 trek speed concept 9.8 with slime modifications) as well. I have Roval rapide 48's with aluminum brake track which came with the road bike, bontrager Aeolus 5's with the aluminum brake track which came with my trek tri bike, I have zipp 808's, but I need a set of shallower wheels. I am going to sell these Roval rapide and keep the Bontragers because I expect to sell the tri bike and replace with a new one soon and will sell those Aeolus 5's with the bike. Struggling with decision between zipp 404's, enve 3.4, enve 6.7, or just some enve 45's. Can't make the decision which way to go......

Well, on Slowtwitch, most people are going to tell you 6.7's. People assume deeper is faster is better. But with your 808's, you have depth covered. Like I said, there may be times when you can throw the 808 rear on if you need to go faster. I'd say go 3.4's because you'll be able to use them for everything. You'll love the 26 mm front too. It gives great control, and the 3.4's are just going to be better suited for a road bike.

You are lucky to have this dilemma!

I actually have a couple of teammates whose race wheels are a custom 6.9 set.

---

The point is, ladies and gentleman, that speed, for lack of a better word, is good. Speed is right, Speed works. Speed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.

Would you say that the 8.9 is comparable to a front 404, in terms of stability in crosswinds?

No, it is comparable to an 808... The 6.7 is comparable to a 404... And yes, I have spent time on all 4 sets. I currently run the 8.9s and will likely pick up a 6 front, simply so I can state the I roll a damn sexy Speed Concept w/ 6.9s...

I have a set of Enve 6.7's with DT Swiss hubs. They are super smooth, and stay predictable in gusty winds. If you are using them for race only, the aero advantage outweighs the weight disadvantage compared to the 3.4's unless the course is exceptionally hilly. I am not sure about the Zipps, but I have heard many more stories of failed Zipps compared to Enve.