ComparisonsSHARQ 42 vs SHARQ 57

ROAD DISC WHEELSETS · SIDE BY SIDE

Fulcrum SHARQ 42 vs Fulcrum SHARQ 57

The Fulcrum SHARQ 42 is 80 g lighter (1,440 g vs 1,520 g claimed per pair) and €232 cheaper (€1,763 vs €1,995) at our October 2026 price check. The rim depth is 47 mm on the SHARQ 42 and 62 mm on the SHARQ 57. Both share the internal width (25 mm) and the listed tyre range (29–76 mm).

SEE THE DIFFERENCE

Both on the same bike.

Drag the handle to switch between the SHARQ 42 (left) and the SHARQ 57 (right) on a Canyon Aeroad CF SLX 8 AXS. Black tyres shown for context.

SHARQ 42 SHARQ 57

Loading bike preview…

Open this pair in the Visualizer ↗
SIDE BY SIDE

Specifications.

Rows with different values are highlighted. Weights are manufacturer claims per pair.

Fulcrum SHARQ 42 and Fulcrum SHARQ 57 specifications
SpecificationFulcrum SHARQ 42Fulcrum SHARQ 57
Claimed pair weight1,440 g1,520 g
Price per pair€1,763€1,995
Price checkedOctober 2026October 2026
MSRP€2,460€2,560
Rim depth · front47 mm62 mm
Rim depth · rear47 mm62 mm
Internal width · front25 mm25 mm
Internal width · rear25 mm25 mm
External width · front29.8 mm29.8 mm
External width · rear29.8 mm29.8 mm
Listed tyre range29–76 mm29–76 mm
Rim typeHookedHooked
Spokes · front / rear24 / 24 · Steel24 / 24 · Steel
BearingsCeramicCeramic
Warranty2 years; conditions apply2 years; conditions apply
Crash replacementNoneNone
BEYOND THE NUMBERS

What the differences mean.

General context for the specifications where these two differ. Numbers in superscript link to the sources below each topic. How much each point matters depends on your riding, tyres and bike.

Weight: what the grams mean

The SHARQ 42 is 80 g lighter per pair (1,440 g vs 1,520 g, manufacturer claims).

On a steady climb only total weight counts: a gram in the wheels costs the same as a gram in the frame or a bottle.1 A common rule of thumb is about 2 seconds per 100 metres of climbing for every kilogram, so 150 g works out at roughly 3 seconds on a 1,000 m climb.2

Rim weight matters somewhat more when you accelerate, because the rim spins as well as moves forward; physically that effect is at most about twice that of frame weight, and only while speeding up.1 Claimed weights are measured differently from brand to brand: some include rim tape and valves, others do not, and tolerances of around ±30 g are common.3 Independent weighing usually lands close to the claim once tape and valves are accounted for.4

  1. University of Illinois physics Q&A: rotating weight
  2. Cycling Uphill: time saved per kilogram
  3. Elitewheels: what claimed weights include
  4. BikeRadar: claimed vs weighed (Shimano RS710 review)

Rim depth: aerodynamics, weight and crosswinds

Rim depth: 47 mm on the SHARQ 42, 62 mm on the SHARQ 57.

SHARQ 42 29.8 mm25 mm47 mm SHARQ 57 29.8 mm25 mm62 mm

Cross-sections drawn to scale from the catalogue values for outer width, internal width and depth; hooked rims show the bead hook. Simplified shape, not the manufacturer's exact profile.

Deeper rims generally reduce aerodynamic drag, which pays off most at higher speeds on flat or rolling roads, but they tend to weigh more and can be more affected by gusty crosswinds. In a BikeRadar comparison, 60 mm aero wheels were about a second per kilometre faster on the flat but slower on steep climbs than a considerably lighter set.1

How a wheel behaves in crosswinds depends on the rim shape as well as its depth,3 which is why TOUR measures steering torque in the wind tunnel, not just drag.2 Shallower rims are generally easier to handle in gusts, something lighter riders and riders on exposed roads tend to notice first.1

  1. BikeRadar: aero vs lightweight wheels
  2. TOUR: how wheels are tested in the lab
  3. road.cc: what wheel designers care about
WHICH ONE FITS

Choose by what matters to you.

Derived from the specifications above. This is not a performance rating.

Choose the Fulcrum SHARQ 42 if…

  • You want to spend less: €1,763, €232 below the SHARQ 57
  • Low weight matters to you: 1,440 g, 80 g less than the SHARQ 57
  • You want the shallower rim: 47 mm against 62 mm
Full SHARQ 42 profile →

Choose the Fulcrum SHARQ 57 if…

  • You want the deeper rim: 62 mm against 47 mm
  • You prefer its look: compare both on the same bike above
Full SHARQ 57 profile →

Common questions.

How much lighter is the Fulcrum SHARQ 42 than the Fulcrum SHARQ 57?

80 g. The Fulcrum SHARQ 42 has a claimed pair weight of 1,440 g, the Fulcrum SHARQ 57 1,520 g. Both figures are manufacturer claims.

Do both take the same tyre widths?

Yes, the range is 29–76 mm for both. Fulcrum approves tyres from 29 mm to 76 mm for both wheelsets. Check the manufacturer's guidance for your exact tyre and pressure.

What is the price difference between the Fulcrum SHARQ 42 and the Fulcrum SHARQ 57?

€232 at our October 2026 price check: the Fulcrum SHARQ 42 cost €1,763 and the Fulcrum SHARQ 57 €1,995 per pair. Prices change; check the current offer with the retailer or manufacturer.

Your next step.

Fulcrum SHARQ 42 Check my Fit → Product profile Fulcrum product page ↗
Fulcrum SHARQ 57 Check my Fit → Product profile Fulcrum product page ↗

Sources & data notes.

All values come from the Show My Bike catalogue, the same records used on the product pages. Prices checked October 2026. Some model-specific details were reviewed against the manufacturer pages. Manufacturer claims are identified as such. No independent product test is claimed, and no winner is declared.