https://www.slowtwitch.com/...Road_Tires_7729.html
https://cyclingtips.com/…-range-of-road-tires
Enve enters the tire market. Probably a smart choice given that one of the major issues surrounding their AR and Foundation wheels was tire compatibility. The tire + wheel system package didn’t really work great for Mavic, but perhaps Enve can nail it. Rolling resistance is middle of the pack. It’ll be interesting to see real world user reviews.
I’m surprised both that they released them with rolling resistance that slow, and also that they designed them around aerodynamics (apparently) and didn’t include any graph of aero testing with their own wheels.
If you pick Tufo as your manufacturer, you’d better make them aero AF.
They did: https://www.bikeradar.com/…-ses-tubeless-tyres/
Tire design goal wasn’t to make the lowest Crr but a tire that balances rolling resistance, aerodynamics, puncture resistance and ride quality: Enve says the new collection of tires — which was developed in partnership with and are manufactured by Czech Republic brand Tufo — doesn’t top the field in any one performance parameter, but rather “strikes a unique balance between all these elements to achieve an everyday rideable, racing performance proposition.â€
VN also sheds light on that: https://www.velonews.com/gear/road-gear/enve-claims-a-watts-aero-savings-puncture-and-rolling-resistance-with-ses-road-tubeless-tires/
.
Ah, thanks. Those graphs are really hard to read on bikeradar, though.
Still, gaining a Watt or so of aero and giving up 3-4W of rolling resistance (vs. GP5000TL) isn’t a world-beating combo.
Historically Tufo made some of the slowest tires that ever existed. I’m surprised ENVE didn’t pair up with Vittoria, Michelin, or Conti.
They did: https://www.bikeradar.com/…-ses-tubeless-tyres/
Tire design goal wasn’t to make the lowest Crr but a tire that balances rolling resistance, aerodynamics, puncture resistance and ride quality: Enve says the new collection of tires — which was developed in partnership with and are manufactured by Czech Republic brand Tufo — doesn’t top the field in any one performance parameter, but rather “strikes a unique balance between all these elements to achieve an everyday rideable, racing performance proposition.â€
VN also sheds light on that: https://www.velonews.com/...road-tubeless-tires/
Their graphs show that the GP5000 is both more aero and lower rolling resistance.
Enve’s website and marketing materials seem designed to sell GP5000TLs rather than their own SES tires, as Enve’s own published data show the GP5000TL beats the SES tires on both aero and rolling resistance.
They did: https://www.bikeradar.com/…-ses-tubeless-tyres/
Tire design goal wasn’t to make the lowest Crr but a tire that balances rolling resistance, aerodynamics, puncture resistance and ride quality: Enve says the new collection of tires — which was developed in partnership with and are manufactured by Czech Republic brand Tufo — doesn’t top the field in any one performance parameter, but rather “strikes a unique balance between all these elements to achieve an everyday rideable, racing performance proposition.â€
VN also sheds light on that: https://www.velonews.com/...road-tubeless-tires/
Their graphs show that the GP5000 is both more aero and lower rolling resistance.
It’s a good thing then (for them) that the GP5K TL isn’t on their “approved” list 
Of course, all of the above is making a good case for looking at options besides Enve’s wheel offerings…
Graphs are slightly easier to read here: https://road.cc/content/tech-news/enve-launches-aero-optimised-ses-tyres-276185
Again, their goal wasn’t to beat the GP5000TL (ironically, a tire that says “mount only on hooked rims” on sidewall, and won’t work with Zipp’s two newest wheels either) in crr. In RollingResistance.com tests ENVE was basically on par with the Pro One TT in crr but 2nd in puncture resistance, while the Pro One was last, and 5000 in the middle (a Pirelli was first but gave up watts). Even when I was racing I’d trade off a watt or two for puncture resistance. In everyday riding, even more so.
I ride 5000’s every day and have had 2 flats in a year… And one of them was my fault because I let the new tube get caught between the rim and tire.
Enve chose to go hookless to increase their profit margin, but in doing so they made it impossible for their wheels to be the fastest. Maybe that works out for them, I don’t know.
They also run the risk of someone not knowing about which tires are approved and not and injuring themselves.
They did: https://www.bikeradar.com/…-ses-tubeless-tyres/
Tire design goal wasn’t to make the lowest Crr but a tire that balances rolling resistance, aerodynamics, puncture resistance and ride quality: Enve says the new collection of tires — which was developed in partnership with and are manufactured by Czech Republic brand Tufo — doesn’t top the field in any one performance parameter, but rather “strikes a unique balance between all these elements to achieve an everyday rideable, racing performance proposition.â€
VN also sheds light on that: https://www.velonews.com/...road-tubeless-tires/
Their graphs show that the GP5000 is both more aero and lower rolling resistance.
Also, in regards to that bikeradar article linked, they say this:
Enve was also at pains to point out that rolling resistance tests performed on steel drums are not always indicative of real world performance.In fairness to Enve, it’s not completely wrong in this regard. As steel drums (even ones with diamond plating as used by BicycleRollingResistance.com) tend to be much smoother and more uniform than an actual road, such tests tend to favour higher pressures and stiffer, less supple tyre casings.
Everything quoted above is demonstrably false in regards to tires ridden on pavement. When tested at pressures one would reasonably run on pavement (i.e. below the pressure “breakpoint”) the roller testing correctly ranks the tire performance. Take it from someone who has actually done the testing and the correlations 
They are repeating supposition and conjecture not based on any actual data.
Shocking!
Are Zipp and Giant off the back too? Hookless is little more than being easier to manufacture https://www.bikeradar.com/features/hookless-rims-road-tubeless/
Yeah, the only point of hookless is to eliminate a step in manufacturing and make them cheaper.
We just released our own take, moments ago: https://www.slowtwitch.com/Products/Things_that_Roll/Tires/ENVE_Launches_SES_Road_Tires_7729.html
.
I’m surprised ENVE didn’t pair up with Vittoria, Michelin, or Conti.
Enve may not have had a choice. If I was the CEO of Conti, I’d give a hard “no” on Enve slapping their brand on my tires.
Yeah, the only point of hookless is to eliminate a step in manufacturing and make them cheaper.
…and by doing so, they push the requirement for higher tolerances onto a component made of fabric and rubber, hence their whole project looking at bead diameters and bead stiffness, 2 things that only matter to that degree when you eliminate the hooks. Seems to me it should be easier for a rim manufacturer to make consistent (and not sharp edged!) bead seat diameters and hooks than to try to get an entire industry of products that are basically textiles to tighten down.
…and by doing so, they push the requirement for higher tolerances onto a component made of fabric and rubber,
Yeah this quote by Enve blaming blow-off problems on tire manufacturers is a bit obnoxious.
Jake Pantone, VP of product and consumer experience at Enve, says: “the reality is that hookless just brings the skeletons of poor tire construction out of the closet. Hooked-beads conceal the problem.
Jesus. I had not seen that. Now I hate Enve even more than I did.
Are Zipp and Giant off the back too? Hookless is little more than being easier to manufacture https://www.bikeradar.com/…-rims-road-tubeless/
Yeah…I read that…and aside from the questionable claim of a “better” transition aero-wise between the tire and rim, everything in that article quoted as an advantage is in manufacturing improvements (i.e. easier/cheaper to make). What am I missing?