"The 33"-Road Bike Racing - Zipp 404's

Anybody have these? Do they feel faster than mortal rims?

Man, they're very expensive. Anybody know current 2007 model MSRP (tubulars)? Best price anywhere?

Why tubulars? According to every tech weenie I know, they are slower than clinchers by a measurable margin.

--Steve

Why tubulars? According to every tech weenie I know, they are slower than clinchers by a measurable margin.

--Steve

Quick, somebody alert every pro team in the UCI, they're all misguided.

Quick, somebody alert every pro team in the UCI, they're all misguided.
Not every team, some are coming around slowly

Why tubulars? According to every tech weenie I know, they are slower than clinchers by a measurable margin.

--Steve

tell your tech weenies not to quit their day jobs.

Anybody have these? Do they feel faster than mortal rims?

Man, they're very expensive. Anybody know current 2007 model MSRP (tubulars)? Best price anywhere?

They are good wheels, you might also consider the Reynolds Status DV's. They beat out the Zipps in a head to head test done by Roadbike Review. I have a set in tubular form and they are just great.

The bike weenie gauntlet has been thrown down:

somebody PROVE to us clinchers are faster.

And you're digressing. Stick to the topic you hopeless gearheads. It's Monday, I'm cranky, don't make me come over there. My legs are too sore.

They are good wheels, you might also consider the Reynolds Status DV's. They beat out the Zipps in a head to head test done by Roadbike Review. I have a set in tubular form and they are just great.

EDR: weight on the Reynolds? Pricing? Durability? I'm about 170lbs, is that too heavy for the Status DV's? Thanks.

The tubulars weigh in at around 1250g and I've seen them under 1300 bucks here (http://www.trisports.com/restdv.html)

I will carefully scope these out ED, thanks. Durability? Your experience? How long have you used them? Your weight?

Why tubulars? According to every tech weenie I know, they are slower than clinchers by a measurable margin.

--Steve

Assuming that all things are equal, rolling resistance (even with the advancement of clinchers this is not a forgone conclusion) and aerodynamics. The tubular wheel and tire will weigh less. So what would make a clincher so much faster?

Also: tubulars can be pumped up to higher psi, no? 150lbs +??

I will carefully scope these out ED, thanks. Durability? Your experience? How long have you used them? Your weight?

Well I'm only 146# but I've seen quite few guys who are heavier ride them. My teammate has used a set of the clinchers to train on for two seasons now and he's 160#. I've got mine at the start of last season and only use them for races. The road here in central Texas are pretty rough chip seal and can get pretty beat up. The wheels have held up quite well. Vinokurtov also races on them and has had nothing but praise for them.

I'm not going to be able to "prove" anything even if I give you the tables from the studies that have been done. I'll simply say that on average, the clincher tires had a lower rolling resistance than the tubulars. Michelin Pro2 Race has measurably less rolling resistance and better puncture resistance than the best tubular tested.

Clinchers = slightly lower rolling resistance
Tubulars = slightly better handling, lighter weight

--Steve

Also: tubulars can be pumped up to higher psi, no? 150lbs +??

Yes the tubulars can be pumped much higher than a clincher. I routinely run mine between 140-150psi. I've tried just about every high end clincher on the market and nothing feels like my tubulars.

I'm not going to be able to "prove" anything even if I give you the tables from the studies that have been done. I'll simply say that Michelin Pro2 Race has measurably less rolling resistance and better puncture resistance than the best tubular tested.

Clinchers = slightly lower rolling resistance
Tubulars = slightly better handling, lighter weight

--Steve

That is far different than saying that the clincher version of the 404 is faster than the tubular version.

Also: tubulars can be pumped up to higher psi, no? 150lbs +??

On real roads, PSI of higher than about 120 actually increases the rolling resistance of tubulars. On a glass-smooth track it's a different story.

--Steve

while my tubulars claim to be able to take 160PSI (Conti Sprinter Gatorskins), I usually run them at about 120.

That is far different than saying that the clincher version of the 404 is faster than the tubular version.

Ok, how about this... According to the numerous studies done by the tech weenies at Bike Tech Review (whose participants include the guy who runs the San Diego wind tunnel and the director sportif of Toyota United among others), the rolling resistance of the Zipp 404 tubular wheel using the very fastest tubular you can buy is higher than the Zipp 404 clincher wheel using a Michelin Pro2Race tire.

If you want to argue that the reduced weight of the tubular is more of a factor than the reduced rolling resistance of the clincher on the courses you ride then you'd be better off with a lighter non-aero wheel.

--Steve

Why tubulars? According to every tech weenie I know, they are slower than clinchers by a measurable margin.

--Steve

Okay how about this, your implication is that the clinchers are much faster. Rolling resistance is only part of the equation. In the real world a tubulars faster cornering and weight are factors. If by measurable you mean 1-2% then your statement is correct if not misleading.

The differences, when on the road, in rolling resistance between the best clinchers and best tubulars are very, very small. And, given the fact that you don't get pinch flats with tubulars, you might very well end up ahead of the game, as opposed to clinchers.

Tubulars= very small rise in CRR (you can't feel this, and you probably wouldn't see any discernable difference in speed), better cornering due to the shape of the tire, no pinch flats, far fewer blowouts, and you don't roll them nearly as easily.

Clinchers= slightly lower CRR than tubies. Shape of tire makes them less adept at cornering. Vulnerable to pinch flats. Corner on a clincher going flat or flat, and you're f***ed.

On real roads, PSI of higher than about 120 actually increases the rolling resistance of tubulars. On a glass-smooth track it's a different story.

--Steve

Contradicted by one recent study I read. The study noted above was funded by Conti who have a (guess the number here) PSI limit on their tubulars. Voodoo physics. Whatever.

The Stratus wheels are ubber durable and tough from my experience. I started racing them around 170#, dropped a water bottle into the front and finished a 60 mile RR on 14 of 16 spokes without rubbing the brake block.

The bike weenie gauntlet has been thrown down:

somebody PROVE to us clinchers are faster.

And you're digressing. Stick to the topic you hopeless gearheads. It's Monday, I'm cranky, don't make me come over there. My legs are too sore.

Bottom of the page on the charts.

http://www.rouesartisanales.com/article-1503651.html

Setting aside the clincher/tubular debate, I train and race on Zipp 404's

http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i165/bobstewart/with-zipps.jpg

In my experience they've been very durable wheels. (did a race sunday with a fairly bumpy cobbled section with them with no problem).

Once they're up to speed, they definitely feel fast. Objectively it might .25 mph or so in the low 20's.

When I first got them, they felt a bit slow accelerating, compared to a lighter set of 303's. However, I pretty much got used to that after a while, and I doubt the actual difference would be measurable.

I race on 404's. They are great wheels, though I have to say that I cracked my original set (when I was at 175lbs) on a nasty pothole. I rebuilt with the pave cross rims (about 100 grams heavier I think) and have rode VERY rough stuff with no problems. If I do Battenkill-Roubaix this year, it will be on my 404's.

I am sooo getting Michelin tires.

I wouldn't be riding the Zipps so much. Weekend fast rides, races, occasional training rides. I rode 340 days last year, it will be more like 320 days in 2007. I'm guessing a set of Zipps might get 60-70 days on the road in a year, maybe 2500 miles. Only on dry roads/good conditions.

I wouldn't be riding the Zipps so much. Weekend fast rides, races, occasional training rides. I rode 340 days last year, it will be more like 320 days in 2007. I'm guessing a set of Zipps might get 60-70 days on the road in a year, maybe 2500 miles. Only on dry roads/good conditions.

That seems like the reasonable thing to do. You'd get to enjoy the wheels, but not use 'em up doing training rides where you'd benefit from extra resistance anyway.

On real roads, PSI of higher than about 120 actually increases the rolling resistance of tubulars. On a glass-smooth track it's a different story.

--Steve

Why the inflection point at 120?

Bottom of the page on the charts.

http://www.rouesartisanales.com/article-1503651.html

Three things jump out at me. First the tubulars were tested at a psi that is far below it's normal range 101psi. Second the differences in CCR are not that big, especially for what you gain with a tubular.

Third this little tidbit from the test itself:

How to find the best tire

In order to match a tire to a given performance requirement, one has to take into account factors that are often mutually exclusive. Riding conditions and purpose (racing or training), have to be weighed against factors such as rolling resistance, comfort, reliability, grip, wear rate, and general cost of running. Only then can one arrive at an optimal compromise and claim to have chosen the most suitable tire.

That seems like the reasonable thing to do. You'd get to enjoy the wheels, but not use 'em up doing training rides where you'd benefit from extra resistance anyway.

You'd just be going slower, you don't get any extra benefit from heavier or slower stuff.

That said, I have no idea why anyone would bother "training" on carbon wheels.

I'd echo what was said earlier about clinchers having slightly less RR but less feel and maybe more prone to flats. Tubulars are lighter weight but quite a bit more PIA. I wouldn't say either one is out-right faster than the other.

I'm surprised people actually run tubulars above 120 psi on anything but a track. They won't conform to the road at all and it just adds to rolling resistance, shakes your teeth out, and lessens their grip in the corners.

You'd just be going slower, you don't get any extra benefit from heavier or slower stuff.

That said, I have no idea why anyone would bother "training" on carbon wheels.

I'd echo what was said earlier about clinchers having slightly less RR but less feel and maybe more prone to flats. Tubulars are lighter weight but quite a bit more PIA. I wouldn't say either one is out-right faster than the other.

I'm surprised people actually run tubulars above 120 psi on anything but a track. They won't conform to the road at all and it just adds to rolling resistance, shakes your teeth out, and lessens their grip in the corners.

I've had none of the above issues at 140psi.

You'd just be going slower, you don't get any extra benefit from heavier or slower stuff.

???

You're going to go out do a base ride. 32h box section rims take more watts to move at 20mph than do 5cm+ carbon rims.

It's harder - how does riding harder not help you?

having aero rims justs raises the speed you will see at a certain wattage.. you train as hard as you want to period, you control your own effort.

having aero rims justs raises the speed you will see at a certain wattage.. you train as hard as you want to period, you control your own effort.

If you're riding alone.

Clincher advocates argue that the improved handling characteristics of tubulars are a myth. Tubular advocates argue that the improved RR of clinchers is a myth. Both have statistics, charts, graphs, race results, and anecdotal evidence to defend their position. So... Potayto potahto. If you like tubulars and don't mind the flat repair disadvantages then I'm sure there's no noticeable difference either way regardless of lab tests.

Back to the OP topic... I have a set of 404s with a PT SL hub that I bought used on eBay. I have only used them for TT efforts and the occasional training ride thus far. Can I justify the expense? Eh, maybe not but life's alot about the wanna-haves rather than the needta-haves at this point. Anyway, I have goal to get below 20:00 on a local 10-mile TT course sometime before I turn 40 and I need all the help I can get. I did 22:05 last year on a road bike without much practice. I got the Zipp wheels and a real TT bike this Christmas in hope of cutting into that significantly.

Until I'm out of the Cat5s, I don't dare to wear the 404s to a crit. It would seem, I dunno, cheesy since nobody else I've raced with has them.

--Steve

If you're riding alone.

Having trouble keeping up with the team during base rides, eh? ;) ;)

--Steve

I train on 303s and race on 404s given the same tire on the same bike the 404s "feel" faster...

later.
jim

Clincher advocates argue that the improved handling characteristics of tubulars are a myth. Tubular advocates argue that the improved RR of clinchers is a myth. Both have statistics, charts, graphs, race results, and anecdotal evidence to defend their position. So... Potayto potahto. If you like tubulars and don't mind the flat repair disadvantages then I'm sure there's no noticeable difference either way regardless of lab tests.

Back to the OP topic... I have a set of 404s with a PT SL hub that I bought used on eBay. I have only used them for TT efforts and the occasional training ride thus far. Can I justify the expense? Eh, maybe not but life's alot about the wanna-haves rather than the needta-haves at this point. Anyway, I have goal to get below 20:00 on a local 10-mile TT course sometime before I turn 40 and I need all the help I can get. I did 22:05 last year on a road bike without much practice. I got the Zipp wheels and a real TT bike this Christmas in hope of cutting into that significantly.

Until I'm out of the Cat5s, I don't dare to wear the 404s to a crit. It would seem, I dunno, cheesy since nobody else I've raced with has them.

--Steve

I'm inclined to this opinion on many cycling related topics. Whether it be training, the effect of weight at the wheels and of course the tubular v clincher debate. There are studies that can produce 'conclusive' evidence on either side of just about any argument. I've had great luck with my tubular wheels thus far and just as I've had great results with the training program that I'm on. It's the 'I'm right and your wrong' crowd that gets me going.

On real roads, PSI of higher than about 120 actually increases the rolling resistance of tubulars. On a glass-smooth track it's a different story.

--Steve
what about a non glass-smooth concrete track? which most in the US are?

Having trouble keeping up with the team during base rides, eh? ;) ;)

--Steve

You know it :D Heck at this point, I'd get dropped by the neighborhood toddlers on their big wheels. They're mean.

what about a non glass-smooth concrete track? which most in the US are?

Yeah, that.

--Steve

Having trouble keeping up with the team during base rides, eh? ;) ;)

--Steve

HAHA... exactly.

I'm convinced pros use tubulars for several reasons:

1.) The wheels are considerably lighter - 200-300 grams lighter when you're taking high end wheels. Most of it on the rims where it's rotational weight.

2.) Tubulars are inherently less puncture prone - they do not get 'pinch' flats at all.

3.) Sewups are inherently better riding and provide better road feel - important when you ride 20K+ miles annually.

4.) They get them from sponsors for FREE. There's usually a team car to carry spares. Team mechanics deal with changing them. So all the hassle/expense the puts guys like me off just isn't a factor for them.

5.) They KNOW it drives bike weenies like me crazy that tubulars are too much of a pain in the ass for MY riding.

I've ridden extensively on sewups and clinchers. I prefer the FEEL of tubulars. But they are a royal pain. For racing/fast rides you can't beat'em. I'm @ the point where I hope the advantage a nice set of Zipps with Conti Sprinters confers is worth the expense hassle. Zipp 404's have excellent resale value, can transfer from old bike to new bike - and I do believe will help if you're trying to chase around 20-40 year old Cat 2/3's on the weekends. Not for nothing but when middle age starts catching up with you, you need all the help you can get.

You'll see. You punkass kid 20 and 30 somethings. Oh yes. Your day in the tank will come. And then YOU'LL be coveting every little speed advantage your weenie wallet can confer upon your old fat slow ass. We may get fatter as we age, but often our wallets do as well. You use what God gives you. And if a pair of 404's descends from heaven on a ray of Hollywood special effects sunlight and lands in my garage, my wife won't even notice them.

I need a Terry Gilliam animation to depict that scene. Where's Monty Python when you need them?

I'm convinced pros use tubulars for several reasons:


Really, like some of the folks who dis carbon frames and components have pointed out, it's all marketing. "The pros ride what they are given" and the companies are just competing for the very large (and lucrative) tubular tire market.

Really, like some of the folks who dis carbon frames and components have pointed out, it's all marketing. "The pros ride what they are given" and the companies are just competing for the very large (and lucrative) tubular tire market.

You really need to add the ;) to your post...some here might have missed the sarcasm.

Really, like some of the folks who dis carbon frames and components have pointed out, it's all marketing. "The pros ride what they are given" and the companies are just competing for the very large (and lucrative) tubular tire market.

The clincher market is exponentially larger, so that doesn't quite add up. If it's 'all marketing' the pro team managers would be getting so much incentive to put their riders on clinchers (which surely outsell sewups 10 to 1 in dollar volume, maybe more) they'd never ride sewups. It really must be a performance consideration, no?

The clincher market is exponentially larger, so that doesn't quite add up. If it's 'all marketing' the pro team managers would be getting so much incentive to put their riders on clinchers (which surely outsell sewups 10 to 1 in dollar volume, maybe more) they'd never ride sewups. It really must be a performance consideration, no?
:bday:

I'm sorry, that knee slapping bike weenie humor went right over my head. Luckily I was wearing my Giro, so I was never in any real danger.

The clincher market is exponentially larger, so that doesn't quite add up. If it's 'all marketing' the pro team managers would be getting so much incentive to put their riders on clinchers (which surely outsell sewups 10 to 1 in dollar volume, maybe more) they'd never ride sewups. It really must be a performance consideration, no?

See Vino I told you the sarcasm would be lost on some. Pat he's being sarcastic...there is no huge tubular market.