This week’s game update includes a fresh set of gravel wheels from Roval: the Terra Aero CLX. While these wheels have been tested covertly by pros for several months, it’s only in the last couple of weeks that we’ve seen them announced publicly.
These wheels are interesting IRL for a few reasons, including their unique “Chopped Aero Speed” design and the front wheel being slightly deeper (50mm) than the rear (45mm). These are the aero gravel wheels in Roval’s lineup, while the Terra CLX III is their lightweight gravel offering.
Here’s how these wheels are described in the Drop Shop: “The fastest gravel race wheels are flat – you read that correctly. Flat. Our novel truncated airfoil may look odd & flat but with up to 5.84 watts faster than Terra CLX II, with aero gains that matter from mile one to mile two hundred.”
The wheels are now available in the Drop Shop, accessible at level 38 and above, for 650,000 Drops. Notably, they are rated 3 stars for aero and 3 for weight, the only gravel wheelset in game with such a high rating apart from the new Zipp 303. This should indicate that they’ll perform well compared to other gravel wheels in Zwift, but since Zwift’s 4-star rating system isn’t precise enough for our taste, we ran these wheels through our standard battery of tests to determine exactly how they perform in Zwift and stack up against other gravel wheelsets.
Let’s dive in and learn all about the in-game performance of the newest gravel wheelset from Roval!
Aero (Flat/Rolling) Performance
Roval’s Terra Aero CLX is neck-and-neck even with the new Zipp 303 XPLR SW, turning in a one-hour flat test time 1/10th of a second faster in our tests.
That means these two wheelsets are both the fastest on Zwift dirt, outpacing all other gravel wheels by approximately 13 seconds across an hour of riding.
Climb Performance
The Terra Aero CLX edges out the new Zipp wheels in our climb test, which aligns with the fact that these hoops from Roval are slightly lighter than Zipp’s IRL.
Roval’s Terra Aero CLX beats the Zipp 303 XPLR SW by 3.8 seconds across an hour of climbing, and beats the older gravel wheels by an additional 1-2 seconds on top of that.
Note: all test results above are from a 75kg, 183cm rider holding 300W steady using the Zwift Gravel frame.
Jungle (Dirt) Performance
The aero performance and slight climbing advantage shown in our pavement tests translate into improved performance for the Roval Terra Aero CLX in our Jungle Circuit test. These wheels edge out the Zipp 303 XPLR SW by just 0.6 across an hour of dirt riding, while edging out all the older gravel wheels by 15+ seconds.
Conclusions
The Roval Terra Aero CLX is Zwift’s new top gravel wheelset, so if you’re racing in the dirt, you’ll want to pick up a set.
That said, I do want to lodge one complaint: it looks like Zwift’s art team created these wheels by just copying the Roval Terra CLX already in game, and giving them a different wordmark and spoke count on the front wheel. The problem is, these new wheels have a deeper rim depth, and that unique “chopped aero” design. Neither of these distinctives show in game, which makes these wheels look pretty boring.
But at least they’re fast.
My guess is the artwork will be updated in a future release.
These wheels have been, or will soon be, added to the following posts:
- Master Zwift Wheels List (added)
- Zwift Shopping Guide: What To Buy from the Drop Shop at Each Level (added)
- Zwift Speed Tests Public Data (Google Sheet) (added)
Questions or comments?
Share below!
Important note: this post contains speed test results for Zwift frames or wheels. These results may change over time, and a bike's performance relative to others may also change. We don't always revise posts when performance rankings change, but we do keep current, master versions of our speed test results which are always available. See the frame charts, wheel charts, and Tron vs Top Performers for current performance data.
For 0.6 seconds per hour I will take the Zipps, they just look cooler
That’s just the Stoneway Sprint cash speaking!
agreed. gravel spec = cannondale + zipp
I love gumwall wheels, so I’m going with the Zipps. 0.6s over an hour is just a rounding error and gumwalls just look far superior. Updating the artwork might change my mind, but probably not.
You write it is 3 and 2 stars. But it is wrong. They are 3 stars both for aero and weight.
Fixed!
@Eric Schlange Any rumours about other gravel wheels dropping this year? Not sure if I should choose between the Zipps and these or wait 🤔
None that I know of. But Zwift certainly doesn’t tell me everything!
Ugh, so I wasted 550k drops on the zipps just so I could race in the now cancelled red rock loop.
I am wondering, are you planning to add Jungle Circuit to the master charts at some point? Thanks in advance!
Hi Eric, I noticed that many of the new frames and wheels are turning in results which differ just by parts of a second from results of other frames or wheels. You used to mention in previous tests that the margin of error is considered to be one second. Is this no longer valid? Do you get more precise results now from your tests? Just wondering if it is worth bothering if wheels are faster by a fraction of a second and this might not even be reproducible.
Very observant, Tom – and with a good memory as well. 🙂
Yes, the test methodology has changed, so now I get results within 1/10 of a second, instead of relying on Strava data (which rounds to the nearest second). The results are reproducible, although I’d say they can vary by maybe 3/10 of a second.
For me, if a frame is within a second or two of another over an hour, I don’t fuss much about going with the faster frame, if I like the look of the other one or want to use a different one for whatever reason. But I do want to present the precise data so people can make their own decisions based on it.
And that is what we all appreciate so much! Thanks for the clarification and insights.
Why can’t I fit the new Roval terra wheels on the Cannondale SuperSix Evo LAB71 frame, AI says that you can. I’m using the zwift ride trainer wahoo kikr core set up
SuperSix Evo LAB71 is a road frame. The gravel frame is the “SuperX LAB71”.
I’ll make the same comment here I made about the Zipp wheels: I don’t understand how the jungle performance gain could be better than both the climbing gain and the flat aero gain, assuming the Crr is the same. If the Crr is different, then this would make sense.
I thought it might be measurement error, but this is the second test in a row where you saw this, so now I think it’s real.
Climbing Alpe depends mostly on weight. Fuego Flats depends mostly on wind resistance. Dirt is a combination of weight and wind resistance. So the difference should fall between the flat and climbing advantage, for example 6 seconds, unless Crr is better. So I think Crr is better. This could be tested with Golden Cheetah Aero Lab, perhaps.
If wheels are 100 grams lighter, that’s around 0.12% of a 75 kg rider with 10 kg of bike, which is around 4 seconds per hour, max. But even a small change in Crr can result in a big change in speed on dirt.
Is the jungle test actually an hour of riding and not x laps of the jungle? There are also descents in the jungle.
Jungle test is one lap of the circuit, with times extrapolated out to an hour based on average lap speed.
Dan: Crr on dirt is different than pavement, for sure. The climb and flat tests basically show how a wheel or frame compares to others in terms of aero and weight specs. The Jungle test sort of combines both of those, but with the added element of using the dirt surface Crr instead of tarmac.