Home > Bike Types > Mountain Bike

Review: Race Face Era SL are the Lightweight Trail Wheels We Needed

riding race face era sl wheels in desert.
12 Comments
Support us! Bikerumor may earn a small commission from affiliate links in this article. Learn More

I’ve been riding Race Face’s wheels for many years, still rocking the original Next SL set on a bike. And they’re still going strong.

What I like about them is, well, a lot of things, but the highlights are combining durable reliability with light weight. But the latest rim profiles and layups upgrade the “ride quality”, and they’re even lighter despite being rated for longer travel bikes.

If that’s what you’re seeking for your own trail bike, read no further because the new Race Face Era SL wheels deliver. Check out our launch coverage, or if you need convincing, read on for my review…

Light Done Right

closeup details of new race face era sl lightweight trail mountain bike wheels.
All product photos ©Tyler Benedict.

At just 1,530g (claimed) for a wheelset, they’re respectably light. That number isn’t pushing any boundaries for XC wheels, but after riding them for several months, I say they ride lighter than that number suggests.

And that’s on a on trails ranging from local NC cross country to Bentonville’s groomed flow trails to Flagstaff’s big mountain descents and Sedona’s hard rock playground. All of this aboard Ari’s latest 110mm-travel Signal Peak with the new Fox 34 SL set at 130mm travel, wrapped in 2.4″ Schwalbe tires.

closeup details of new race face era sl lightweight trail mountain bike wheels.

With 385g rims, which is the lightest rim Race Face has ever made, they accelerate quickly and turn sharp. So, even though some ultralight wheelsets come in 200-ish grams lighter, few have lighter rims (because there’s a limit to what’s possible), so these wheels’ outer rotational weight is on par with the lightest options on the market.

But if you really want lighter wheels, wait until this fall when they launch a Center Lock version that’ll come in at a claimed 1480g. They won’t be e-MTB rated like these 6-bolt versions, but if you’re counting 50g on an e-bike, you may need to rethink your priorities.

closeup details of new race face era sl lightweight trail mountain bike wheels.

SIDE NOTE: They come taped with valve stems installed, but those things are not counted in the claimed weights. I received the wheels from Race Face with tires already mounted, so I haven’t pulled them off to get actual weights yet…will update this post when I do.

Even if I was a put XC racer on a *gasp* hardtail, I think I’d keep these on the bike because of the…

Ride Feels

riding race face era sl wheels in desert.
All action photos courtesy of Fox.

Ride quality has become a bigger deal in the past five years. With stiffness, toughness, and lightweight all pretty well sorted, the magic for any new wheelset (or bike frame, for that matter) comes in how they feel.

race face era sl MTB wheels shown on a bike.

As tires have gotten wider and more supple, and handlebars like Race Face’s own new Era (among others) adding intentional compliance, picking apart the wheel’s influence over traction and comfort is not an exact science.

riding race face era sl wheels in desert.

But if you’re upgrading from an older carbon wheelset, the smoother ride quality of the Era SL should be immediately apparent. This, combined with good lateral stiffness, helps the wheels track more precisely since they’re not ping-ponging off every root and rock.

Toughness

race face era sl MTB wheels shown on a bike.

Race Face rates them for bikes up to 140mm of travel. If you need something bigger and burlier, last year’s Era Wheels are the ticket.

The Era SL’s rims have a 29mm internal width, they’ll fit up to 2.6″ wide tires to handle all of that. I think the sweet spot is more in the downcountry-to-trail bike range, but with a lifetime warranty, you can push them pretty hard knowing that Race Face’s own riders are probably pushing them harder.

closeup details of new race face era sl lightweight trail mountain bike wheels.

The rim profiles are basically hookless, but there is a tiny bump inward to create the “anvil” shape. That shape gives them a broad crash pad to support impacts, with rounded corners to prevent pinch flats.

race face era sl MTB wheels shown on a bike.

I’ve only tested them on a short-travel “fun country” (Ari’s words, but I like it) bike, but have definitely smashed a few roots and rocks and taken a few hard landings on them.

I’m a bigger rider, about 6’2″ and 200lbs fully kitted, and I have zero complaints. They have a 130kg (286lb) system (rider + bike) weight limit, so I’m not even close to their limit.

The Hubs

closeup details of new race face era sl vault hubs.

Race Face’s Vault Hubs are a big part of the picture. Literally. They’re huge.

And I think that’s why these wheels handle so well. They provide a taller “flange”, which lets them run shorter spokes. Which enables lighter, shallower rims. Which means they can get good bracing angles without needing a lot of spokes…or using thicker, stiffer spokes.

closeup details of new race face era sl vault hubs.

In my armchair engineering role, all of that adds up to good radial compliance with good lateral stiffness. Race Face intentionally built in some lateral compliance, but only enough to help the wheels deflect sideways impacts without diminishing steering or tracking accuracy.

Plus, they look good. And they’re not too loud. You’ll hear the engagement from 60 teeth and six pawls (staggered for a snappy-enough 3º engagement), but it’s not annoyingly loud.

The Takeaway

riding race face era sl wheels in desert.

Ummmm, buy them?

MSRP for the Race Face Era SL wheels is $1,649, which is highly competitive. Maybe we can thank all the direct-to-consumer brands for driving down the price points, but few if any of those brands have the North Shore track record of abusing their products like Race Face.

Not only do the specs (with a lifetime warranty!) add up to a winner, the performance is so good I don’t plan on taking them off my bike any time soon.

RaceFace.com

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

12 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
McDörben
McDörben
7 days ago

What spokes are used?

Brandon
Brandon
6 days ago
Reply to  McDörben

Sapim laser

Smokestack
Smokestack
5 days ago

I think another part in their ride feel has to do with how the wheel is laced. Not having the spokes go over-under at the outer cross greatly affects a wheel’s lateral stiffness. Downside is it does put more strain on the head and threaded portion of the spoke.

Whodee
Whodee
5 days ago
Reply to  Smokestack

How does removing the crossing increase the strain on a spoke? Not being snarky, honestly interested because that seems counterintuitive.

Smokestack
Smokestack
5 days ago
Reply to  Whodee

It’s not so much as removing the cross as negating it. Having the spokes in contact with each other (over-under, where the outboard spokes goes under the inboard at the cross) effectively acts like increasing the flange diameter, so the spokes perform like they’re ‘shorter’. Additionally, with the spokes in contact both spokes share side loading making a stiffer structure. It’s an easy enough experiment to run on any existing wheel if you’re familiar with wheel building. I have relaced a couple wheels for clydesdales on 28h direct pull wheelsets missing the over-under cross, and it tightened up the feel of the wheels considerably, even running 10kgf lower tension.

Whodee
Whodee
5 days ago
Reply to  Smokestack

Well, that was a very informative response that didn’t address my question. I might have worded it poorly. I meant the over-under, not the cross pattern.

Smokestack
Smokestack
4 days ago
Reply to  Whodee

I think I see the error. From OP, “Downside is it does put more strain on the head and threaded portion of the spoke.” I should have clarified that it creates more strain on spokes that do not go over under each other as each spoke functions as one rather than a pair sharing a side load. Sorry about that.

Whodee
Whodee
4 days ago
Reply to  Smokestack

I see what you’re saying, but it doesn’t actually do that. None of the spokes in a wheel act singly or in pairs regardless of over/under crossings unless you assume the rim has zero lateral stiffness. Lateral wheel loads are always carried by multiple spokes, and a single spoke connecting point A on the rim to point B on the hub will have less stress on it than two spokes interacting that aren’t rigidly affixed to each other.

But my question to your original commend wasn’t about lateral stiffness. It was questioning the assertion that somehow a single spoke had higher strain than an over/under pair. The load isn’t reduced simply because two spokes are touching, because the total number of spokes carrying load doesn’t change.

Smokestack
Smokestack
3 days ago
Reply to  Whodee

You don’t have to believe me, I’m ok with that. I’ve seen the test data from wheel system tests from my past life in the industry and the data confirms my assertion. Overlapping lace pattern creates a stiffer wheel laterally. Similar examples were posited by Jobst Brandt in his book. It’s easy enough to verify if you can build a wheel.

Whodee
Whodee
3 days ago
Reply to  Smokestack

You keep going back to lateral stiffness. I’ve repeatedly said that’s not my question. I know that crossing spokes makes a more laterally stiff wheel. Anything you do to increase the bracing angle makes a wheel laterally stiffer and crossing spokes over is a beautifully simple solution to that. But telling someone to build a wheel to prove it is ridiculous because people don’t have equipment to properly validate the data and it’s been shown our anecdotal feelings about how stiff a wheel feels are generally completely off-base because of all the variables involved.

I asked why does a spoke that does not interact with another spoke crossing over or under it somehow have increased strain on it? Where did you get that claim from? It’s fine if that’s just your feeling and you have nothing to back it up. I just want to know if you have a source so I can look into it because, as I initially said, it’s very counterintuitive.

Last edited 3 days ago by Whodee
Smokestack
Smokestack
2 days ago
Reply to  Whodee

As they are touching they distribute the load. If the spokes are not touching, that load is carried by one spoke only. A spoke is under greatest tension at 12 o’clock on the wheel, correct? When under tension, a crossed spoke shares some of that tension to its crossed member, decreasing its strain at the threads and head or J bend. As far as the ridiculousness of me suggesting to build a wheel, well, that’s subjective. If you can build a wheel well and easily it’s mighty simple and the resulting ride feel is absolutely noticeable. As for a source, pick up the book Bicycle Wheel Science by the aforementioned Jobst Brandt. Probably the best easily accessed info for the engineering principles involved in a bicycle wheel.

FritzP
FritzP
2 days ago
Reply to  Smokestack

I don’t think tension affects wheel stiffness as long as the spoke isn’t completely unloaded.

Subscribe Now

Sign up to receive BikeRumor content direct to your inbox.