Zipp 404 special edition V Mavic Carbonne SL

jag con

Hi all am looking at 2 sets of wheels

http://www.cyclesuperstore.ie/shop/pc/viewPrd.asp?idcategory=89&idproduct=33584

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Models.aspx?ModelID=30825

The Zipp are lighter by about 150g i know this does not make much of a difference

any advice

Con

Raam

What kind of cycling do you plan on doing with them?

blorg

I only have the Zipps, in tubular and they are phenomenal. Don't know about the clinchers.

Quigs I believe has or had both in clincher and he reckons the Mavics hold up on Irish roads better.

That price on the Zipps looks very low, current RRP is more like £1,500/€1,800 AFAIK. Think it might be due to the non-dimpled rims. I doubt that makes much of a difference but who knows, I didn't think my Zipps would transform the bike either!

Very much race only wheels for me.

niceonetom

jag con wrote: »

Hi all am looking at 2 sets of wheels

http://www.cyclesuperstore.ie/shop/pc/viewPrd.asp?idcategory=89&idproduct=33584

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Models.aspx?ModelID=30825

The Zipp are lighter by about 150g i know this does not make much of a difference

any advice

Con

If you're buying deep section clinchers then weight shouldn't be your priority. You could get a pair of low-profile clinchers that would be much cheaper and much lighter than either of those pairs.

If we're just comparing those two though, it would really be down to what your priorities are. What are the wheels intended for? Racing only or training etc? The Zipps would be significantly more delicate (races only if it was my money), but the mavics have a rep for being very sturdy. The zipps would certainly out perform the mavics in aero terms though...

~€380 in the difference makes it difficult to compare them in terms of vfm too.

Mavics sound good.

Zipps look better.

Chips Lovell

Mavics all the way for me. Reputed to be far more sturdy and Irish roads are not kind to wheels. Easier on the pocket too.

EDIT: Yes, I think Quigs had both alright, or maybe the Zipps were tubs, but he'd be a good man to ask.

jag con

Planning to do sportives and a couple of club TT during the summer

Quigs Snr

Cosmics are a good all rounder but heavy enough (that being said mine were sitting under an A1 rider in Navan at the weekend and they didn't hold him back at all).

Zipps are race only if you ask me, they look great, ride great and break easy compared to other wheels, even the heavier clinchers in my experience. I would not ride one as an everyday wheel, whilst I would ride the Cosmics in all conditions and seasons. The Zipp tubs are relatively fragile too but at least you get a significant weight and ride quality advantage to compensate. At the end of the RAS last year none of our teams sets of Zipp wheels were intact (cracked rims, hubs coming loose etc..) and the Halfords team who were all using them had quite a bit of trouble too. Nonetheless, despite all the trouble every one of our guys to a man would choose the zipps if practical considerations did not come into play.

Tough call. Too tough for me so I bought both. By the way, replaced the freehub on my Cosmics recently for 40 euro or so, did the same with the 404's and because mine are an older model, had to order the part from the US for $100 + $60 shipping + €47 Customs, VAT and UPS charges. If you are on any sort of a budget... the Mavics are cheaper to run.

niceonetom

jag con wrote: »

Planning to do sportives and a couple of club TT during the summer

In that case I'd sacrifice the marginal performance benefit of the Zipps and take the reliability of the carbones (the ones with the white decals!).

Now all you've got to do is figure out what to do with the money we just saved you.

jag con

niceonetom wrote: »

In that case I'd sacrifice the marginal performance benefit of the Zipps and take the reliability of the carbones (the ones with the white decals!).

Now all you've got to do is figure out what to do with the money we just saved you.

A couple of pints will be the order with the money saved

Con:D:D

Quigs Snr

Thats a good point, unless your bike is yellow, make sure to replace the decals (available in lots of colors on ebay)!

Like I did - seen here on an old bike I had resprayed.

niceonetom

Quigs Snr wrote: »

Thats a good point, unless your bike is yellow, make sure to replace the decals (available in lots of colors on ebay)!

Like I did - seen here on an old bike I had resprayed.

Nice!

You can get the carbones with white decals without resorting to after market decals now though. Someone at mavic obviously figured out that the yellow was costing them sales... LINK

blorg

I mentioned it before but for sportives which are typically hilly I would consider getting nice light non-deep section wheels instead. They are meant to be surprisingly aerodynamic in wind tunnel testing incidentally.

TTs bike position is going to make a big difference, so aerobars and changing your position would be recommended. I read once that not wearing mitts was worth more than an aero front wheel, make of that what you will.

Having said that the Zipps certainly felt great, whether it was the aero, the light weight or the tubular tyres though I don't know.

And deep section certainly looks bling.

niceonetom

Good point blorg.

jag, you should probably buy these too (the carbones and these come in at about the same as the Zipps alone) - that would cover you for most occasions.

Lumen

I would buy neither.

This is a subjective judgement, since wheels don't objectively matter, but carbon fairings on alloy rims make no sense to me. They weight and ugliness makes them too compromised.

If you are looking for performance, buy a full carbon rim, tubular or clincher. It will be lighter and probably cheaper than these options.

The only downside of carbon rims is use in crappy conditions, but IMO you shouldn't be using deep section rims in those conditions, instead use traditional alloy wheels.

A few ideas for fancy wheels right now:

Bad weather alloy clinchers:
Shimano RS80, 24mm alloy, 1540g, €396
Shimano 7850 CL, 24mm alloy, 1440g, €572

Summer/race deep carbon clinchers:
Reynolds Assault, 45mm carbon, 1525g, €943
Soul C4.0, 40mm carbon, 1390g, €930 (95kg weight limit)
Soul C5.0, 50mm carbon, 1465g, €1100 (no weight limit)

Summer/race deep carbon tubulars:
FFWD F4R, 40mm carbon, 1260g, €998
Reynolds Assault tubular, 45mm carbon, ? price/weight
Soul C5.0T, 50mm carbon, 1315g, €1100

I also don't really "get" shallow section carbon clinchers, except perhaps for hll TTs for the tub-phobic. They can't really beat alloy clinchers for weight/strength and are not aero enough to justify the compromises.

If money were no object and I wanted tubulars I'd have 303s or 404s (or Lightweights, obviously). I believe (without any real basis other than internet rumour and Zipp marketing spin) that Zipp tubs are now at least as strong as anything else. The only problem is that all wheels are destructible, and therefore a broken Zipp will be much more expensive to replace than a broken Gigantex rim or whatever.

For tubs, there is always the Planet-X option, although they are quite heavy.

edit: and FWIW I've put my money where my mouth is and ordered some Soul 5.0 carbon clinchers.

edit #2: I bow to Quigs' practical experience regarding strength, obviously. It's a shame to read about the tubular Zipps not holding up last year - I thought Zipp had "cracked" the issue with the 2009 versions. Obviously not.

edit #3: also, if I weighed more than 80kg I wouldn't even consider carbon rims. At <70kg I think I can risk it. How much do you weigh?

Quigs Snr

I don't see the point to clincher zipps to be honest. BTW, from what I saw last year the newer 09 model Zipps didn't experience any rim failure like the older ones did (at an alarming rate) - but did have problems keeping the bearings / hub ends compressed, so they could well have improved in terms of rim strength. At the end of the day, some of the holes you hit on Irish roads, it's just not possible for any wheel to be designed to handle that on a regular basis and as pointed out previously, repairs are expensive. Regardless of any issues however and I am sure that Blorg will back me on this, well tuned set of zipp tubs feel great, hence I still have mine.

As Lumen said, I wouldn't be crazy on the planet X 50's. I had them and they were ok for the money and the rims themselves were ok, when running well they felt good but you get what you pay for and the hubs were not up to much with the cheapo spokes at the time breaking easy. That being said if anyone knows anyone selling a Planet X Pro Carbon 82 front wheel (or any 60mm - 90mm front wheel) let me know, it would be ideal for my TT bike.

I think you have all finally cracked me with those Dura Ace CL 7850's by the way, I am just going to go get some. Perhaps sell my Kysrium ES and Fulcrum 5's to fund them/make space/justify it to myself.

uberwolf

fred question. Why is weight less of a concern on deep section?

sy

Quigs Snr wrote: »

...As Lumen said, I wouldn't be crazy on the planet X 50's. I had them and they were ok for the money and the rims themselves were ok, when running well they felt good but you get what you pay for and the hubs were not up to much with the cheapo spokes at the time breaking easy.

@ Quigs
Lots of experience on riding bikes! on both clinchers and tubs but never rode carbon wheels. Just noticed that Planet X have great deal on above mentioned wheels and was tempted at £408 , however you seem to think they are not up to much. Was just buying for a bit of bling as not racing:). Are they the same wheels you've mentioned or are they a newer version. Half the price of the Carbones. Are they a waste of money even at this price?
Apologies OP for hijacking thread

jwshooter

wiggle were doing a hell of a good deal on the mavic cosmic

Lumen

@sy, I think Planet-X use Gigantex rims, but wheelsmith.co.uk will build Gigantex tubulars with whatever hubs and spokes you want.

I haven't ordered anything from them but I will at some point (probably some strong alloy tubulars for CX next winter).

Lumen

uberwolf wrote: »

Why is weight less of a concern on deep section?

It isn't, IMO. People just ignore the weight because it's a convenient way of justifying faired alloy rims, which have obvious practical benefits.

Having looked at a lot of carbon-rimmed wheels recently, there is a correlation between rim depth and strength, with the "climbing" wheels generally being less stiff, having rider weight limits, and needing truing more often (because of flex causing spokes to go loose, I think).

So in the new world order of carbon wheels, there is a happy correlation between aero-ness and strength, and the deeper rims are not much heavier either. The difference between a 32mm Reynolds Assault and 46mm Reynolds Attack is only about 40g.

The remaining area of weakness in carbon rims seems to be the braking surface, but I guess that matters less in proper racing where such products are easier to justify.

niceonetom

Hasn't there always been a correlation between rim-depth and strength, regardless of material? Simply due to using more material? It's just with carbon, being lighter/strong-per-gram the weight penalty is reduced.

Where'd you order those SOUL wheels Lumen? Direct from Singapore or do they have a distributor in Europe? They claim 1330g for their low-profile alu clinchers - have you found their claims to be trustworthy in your no-doubt-extensive googling?

Lumen wrote: »

The remaining area of weakness in carbon rims seems to be the braking surface, but I guess that matters less in proper racing where such products are easier to justify.

This is a bit of a deal breaker for me. To get a truly light pair of wheels full carbon seems to be the only option, but the only reason I would want really light wheels would be to do mountain sportives where I feel an alu brake-surface would be hugely preferable while trying to get down a long technical descent while several thousand others are trying to do likewise...

mountain top wheel changes! that's what I need!

Quigs Snr

Sy, the Planet X wheels could well be fine at that price point. For sure there are no other carbon tubs out there that I am aware of at that pricepoint. They have changed the hubs since I got mine for seemingly no-name ones that I hear have better reliability. The old American classic hubs they had were what I really didn't like about them, their bearings were very small and very weak. A spoke snapped on a climb in a race also causing the wheel to go out of true, but that can happen with any wheel, saw it happen to a new set of Corima's recently and it was easily fixed although the tyre had to be reglued as the spoke nipples are internal. I hear the spokes are better these days also.

I never thought they were a bad wheel just not as good as some other wheels (which admittedly cost 3 times as much). Probably worth a punt if you want bling for a low price.

Edit: Oh yeah, get Swisstop yellow brake pads if you want to stop in the rain. The Equinox ones Planet X used to try sell you were ok too, but I found the Dura Ace 7800 Carbon pads were next to useless with the Planet X rims.

Raam

I want these
Front
Rear

Lumen

niceonetom wrote: »

Hasn't there always been a correlation between rim-depth and strength, regardless of material? Simply due to using more material? It's just with carbon, being lighter/strong-per-gram the weight penalty is reduced.

Indeed. But deep section alloy rims really are very heavy and have poor ride quality, to the point where I wouldn't bother except maybe for track wheels. The deep section alloy Soul wheels are almost 500g heavier for an extra 16mm of rim depth (compared to 40g for 14mm with Reynolds Attack/Assault).

niceonetom wrote: »

Where'd you order those SOUL wheels Lumen? Direct from Singapore or do they have a distributor in Europe?

Direct from Singapore. The prices I quoted above include VAT and duty. It's almost 1-1 with the dollar once you add those in. Grrr.

To be honest I should just buy Reynolds, but I like trying different stuff, and getting to choose my nipple materials and colours.

niceonetom wrote: »

They claim 1330g for their low-profile alu clinchers - have you found their claims to be trustworthy in your no-doubt-extensive googling?

Not much to go on, a bit mixed. Best thread here. The alloy clinchers are cheap enough to be worth a risk, maybe.

niceonetom wrote: »

This is a bit of a deal breaker for me. To get a truly light pair of wheels full carbon seems to be the only option, but the only reason I would want really light wheels would be to do mountain sportives where I feel an alu brake-surface would be hugely preferable while trying to get down a long technical descent while several thousand others are trying to do likewise...

To get a truly light and deep pair of wheels full carbon is the only option, but wheelsmith.co.uk have 1250g alloy climbing wheels on their gallery page, which supports the contention that a good wheelbuilder can always beat factory wheels. Carbon clinchers (Lightweights aside) won't be lighter than that, only deeper with less spokes. Spoke counts don't matter going up hills.

Lumen

Raam wrote: »

I want these
Front
Rear

That's mad Ted.

80% of the price of Lightweights (which are several hundred grams lighter, 20mm deeper and never need truing) and about the same price and weight as some (12mm deeper) custom Edge 45s.

They are real purdy though.

Raam

Lightweights never need truing?

Lumen

Raam wrote: »

Lightweights never need truing?

More than that, they can't be trued. The spokes are bonded in place.

Carbonsports claim never to have had a spoke or wheel failure caused by normal use (i.e. not a crash or sticking a foot through the spokes).

Which is just as well, since if a spoke breaks you have to turn the wheel into coathangers and sell them on e-bay to pay for a replacement.

Raam

Did I hear something similar about Cosmic Ultimates? Something about some part not being serviceable.

Lumen

Raam wrote: »

Did I hear something similar about Cosmic Ultimates? Something about some part not being serviceable.

Yes, Mavic used similar principles.

CompetitiveCyclist wrote:

The Mavic Cosmic Carbone Ultimate wheelset starts with a 100% woven 12k carbon fiber rim. The rear rim is slightly asymmetric for greater strength. There are 16 spokes in the front wheel, 20 in the rear. The front wheel and the drive side of the rear are comprised of unidirectional carbon fiber spokes that extend from one side of the rim, to the hub, where they're bonded, to the other side. They're set up in a 1x pattern. The non-drive side of the rear wheel has radial unidirectional carbon fiber spokes that have a metal threaded end near the hub. These are attached to spoke nipples and can be trued with a green Park spoke wrench.

It's all well into crazy territory, particularly when a 303 tubular is cheaper, lighter, deeper, more aero and fully rebuildable.

Mavic does say the Ultimates are suitable for "everyday use" though, which is comforting. You wouldn't want a spoke breaking on your commute.

Raam

I reckon the Ultimates would complete the look on my commuter bike.

delynet

One the topic of wheels - Low spoke counts mean the squirrels can get through!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/bike/76039319/in/photostream/

jag con

Right so thanks for all the advice i think i should sty away from the Zipps as ive heard a few things about them and as you guys say they are really for racing only

so it looks like it is between these two

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Models.aspx?ModelID=40319

http://www.wiggle.co.uk/p/cycle/7/Mavic_Cosmic_Carbone_SL_Clincher_Wheelset/5360042824/

hmm i have some thinking to do

Con

Raam

Those Reynolds are real purdy.

Lumen

Raam wrote: »

Those Reynolds are real purdy.

Holiday wheels, definitely.

Planet X

Is that the new Kryptonite New York hanging from the saddle rails or what?

Raam

At a similar price point we also have
FSA RD 488
Pro-Lite Gavia
Token T50 Tubs

Raam

Planet X wrote: »

Is that the new Kryptonite New York hanging from the saddle rails or what?

Looks like a 3T Doric, or a variant.

Lumen

Planet X wrote: »

Is that the new Kryptonite New York hanging from the saddle rails or what?

Looks like a KCNC Ti Pro seatpost. Typical weightweenie issue.

@jag_con, have a read of the reviews on roadbikereview.com if you haven't already.

"Carbon rims are not for everyone" seems a fairly consistent theme w.r.t braking performance, especially in the wet.

So it just comes down to all weather practicality* of the alloy braking surface vs lightweight/bling of the carbon.

If you end up hating either I'm sure you'll be able to offload them, as both Reynolds and Mavic are well respected brands.

* notwithstanding the fact that Quigs has previously reported that his Cosmics fill up with water when it rains. :pac:

Lumen

Raam wrote: »

At a similar price point we also have
FSA RD 488
Pro-Lite Gavia
Token T50 Tubs

The Tokens and FSAs are tubulars, and those Pro-lites weigh over 2.5kg a set. :eek:

The Tokens do look good value though, except that I think they use Gigantex rims (same rim as Planet-X 50s but much more expensive).

uberwolf

jag con wrote: »

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Models.aspx?ModelID=40319

If CRC had a wish list function, those would now be added. wow.

NM - they do. and added.

sy

These look pretty nice to me

uberwolf

sy wrote: »

These look pretty nice to me

keen price, and allow ordinary brake pads be used.

sy

Also coloured nipples & hubs for $20 extra, as Lumen implied earlier

tribesman

Anyone got any opinions on the SRAM S60? Seems to be a good compromise with the toroidal shape of the zipps, an alu braking surface, and a cheaper price than the 404. Anyone know if they are any more durable than the zipp? How about maintenance?

Sorry to slightly hijack the thread but unless I'm missing something these seem like a good option for the OP.

Lumen

tribesman wrote: »

Anyone got any opinions on the SRAM S60? Seems to be a good compromise with the toroidal shape of the zipps, an alu braking surface, and a cheaper price than the 404. Anyone know if they are any more durable than the zipp? How about maintenance?

Sorry to slightly hijack the thread but unless I'm missing something these seem like a good option for the OP.

I think they are Zipps.

Discussion here.

A quick scan of that indicates that they're rebadged Flashpoints, which are made by Zipp using a simpler process.

60mm is pretty deep, might be a bit of a handful. And they're 1850g, but you get the toroidal rim shape which might make you 0.2kph faster or whatever.

SRAM have other wheels.

Raam

They are also hideous.

blorg

SRAM own Zipp and their wheels are as Lumen says rebadged Flashpoints. Basically the same shape but without the dimples and a hell of a lot heavier. Personally I like the decals.

Lumen

blorg wrote: »

Personally I like the decals.

I'd be trying to get the SRAM logos lined up perfectly at every stop. That's got to add some time to the average sportive.

kerryscoob

jag con wrote: »

Right so thanks for all the advice i think i should sty away from the Zipps as ive heard a few things about them and as you guys say they are really for racing only

so it looks like it is between these two

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Models.aspx?ModelID=40319

http://www.wiggle.co.uk/p/cycle/7/Mavic_Cosmic_Carbone_SL_Clincher_Wheelset/5360042824/

hmm i have some thinking to do

Con

Kilgrews in Cork have the Cosmic cheaper.

Raam

Lumen wrote: »

I'd be trying to get the SRAM logos lined up perfectly at every stop. That's got to add some time to the average sportive.

Don't underestimate the importance of this. Imagine how stupid you would look in pictures with the decals so obviously out of sync with each other. At least with less obvious decals the situation isn't as drastic.

Lumen

Hub review. Not so relevant to buying factory wheels, but it does include the DT240 which is a very common OEM choice for fancy wheels.

And it has some nice hub porn, like this: