Has anyone any reviews on these wheels?
How would they compare to the 2010 or 2011 Reynolds Assault wheels?
(taking price not into consideration)

ive got the 303 carbon clincher. i also have the attack and assault.
riding comparison: 303 are much more stable. much more stiff. the reynolds feel "dead" compared to the zipps. in cross winds the 303 is more stable than the attack 32 depth for sure. you can also really tell the aerodynamic difference and the wheels feel much easier to keep up at speed and spin very nicely. money aside, the 303 carbon clincher is probably the industries first wheel that is available for everyday use, yet aero enough for race use as well. the 404 CC is also in this category, but slightly deep for everyday use. if i had to own one wheelset, it woudl be the 303 CC.

i put mine through an event here locally that is an incredibly tough event on equipment. its a 65 mile rock road, trail, service road race. i flatted 3 times (has nothing to do with the wheels) and smacked a large rock once very hard. these wheels came out without a mark. was impressed. if i would have known this event was this tough and hard on equipment i would have taken old aluminum wheels. was my first time doing it. many were on mountain bikes.

i ahve also been using these for cross this year without any issues at 40 psi with a clemente pdx tire.

the 303FC seem to have superior aero than the 404 given rim depth/aero ratio


according to zipp 2012 catalog

303FC 78 seconds/26 watts saved for a 40k tt
404FC 80 seconds/27 watts saved for a 40k tt

http://www.bluetoad.com/publication/?i=79814

_________________
Current Rides:

2010 SWorks SL3 7090 di2
2013 Trek 6.5 PO 9070 di2

Which pads did you use for your cross breaks? I didn't think Zipp had a canti style pad (yet?).

_________________
Toys-R-Us

Obviously the 404FC data is superior. How do you work out the 303s have "superior aero than the 404 given the rim depth/aero ratio"?

404FC is totally usable as an everyday wheel.

Remaining question mark on these wheels is performance under prolonged braking. The evidence so far suggests they have solved the problems of carbon clinchers, but the number of sets being put to this use must be pretty small still.

I think the idea is that the 303 is only 1W different than the 404 (based on their own data), but it's lighter and has a lower profile.

-Eric

_________________
www.ergottwheels.com

Interesting - Please explain further.

I've had the 404FC CC since the summer - some summary points would be;

- no concerns for over heating
- no worries about flats like there would be with tubs
- its rideable in the wind & gusts, ime handles better than a typical 32h low profile training wheel (you forget its 58mm deep very quickly IRT handling - it never rides like it has that much depth in the wind - handles equal or better than standard profile 38mm rims)
- has enough ride benefits like good handling & a good turn of speed to make it worthwhile & fun to use pretty much all the time

The only catch is a) its a pricey rim to write off by crashing it, like maybe you would do in the winter & b) if your riding significant gradients the weight on the rim will be noticeable.

That said the rim weight difference between 303 & 404 CC is about 40g. Its a big reduction in depth for very little weight improvement. I don't see why you'd bother to trade down to the 303 over the 404 as the handling in the wind is not an issue .. (75kg, 6ft fwiw)

while the number of wheels out in the market probably isnt as high as the early adopters, i can confidently say there are thousands out there already.
one of the first things my boss did when he got the 404CC is go to france and bomb down some monster descents. ee brakes and with the original zipp cork pads. i sent him with some swiss-stop yellows just in case. halfway down the first descent, he said the brakes stopped being effective. he swapped out the pads and kept going, no problems all week. so yes, he got their temps up.
otoh, i've seen every other kind of carbon wheel have heat problems, edge/enve, easton, reynolds, etc., even with relatively light riders.

yes, the 404 CC is capable for everyday.

Mr_Tim: you are crazy if you say the 404 CC has the same riding characteristics of a typical box shape alum wheel. As you say: "handles better than a typical 32h low profile training wheel ". Sorry, i dont like to disagree or call anyone out, but your nuts on this one. Yes, the 404 handles well, but in cross winds for everyday wheels, the 404 CC has some disadvantages. ive owned them, so i am not just saying that. i can tell a difference in my 303 and 404 with my eyes closed. sorry to say it. again, this doesnt make the 404 unusable, but just not as comfortable as a less deep wheel for everyday use. With that being said, size of rider has a lot to do with that also.

for my cross setup i use swisstop flash pro yellow. (zipps new tangente platinum are the same thing, just dyed silver). these pads do well, but in my opinion on the road are too grabby and twitchy. i truly feel that for road use that the zipp cork pads are the best pads that have been developed. word on the street is that they are done making them, so if you enjoy those cork pads as much as i do- stock up! the cork is very consistent in braking in dry and in wet. they are hte only pad that is 100% predictable in my opinion. When the yellow/platinum pads are applied for 4+ seconds firmly, they get grabby and surge.

Just to add a couple things here...we're well into the tens of thousands of carbon clinchers without a single heat-related failure thus far (confident in our testing and production methods, yet knocking on wood ).

Regarding the aerodynamic savings, that is predicated on average yaw of ten degrees (if memory serves regarding what was included in the catalog, as I can't access it at the moment). Effective yaw conditions from 12 degrees on to approximately 18 degrees will favor the 404 by more significant amounts, but this is also dependent on tire width, and to a lesser extent, model.

Also, the Tangente Platinum pads are most assuredly not the same as SwissStop yellows. I melted many a pad and otherwise abused a variety of rims as we worked with SwissStop to develop this new compound, which is proprietary. Heat management, wet braking performance, and (perhaps most noticeably given some riders' preferences) modulation are all improved relative to the SwissStop yellows.

It is correct that our cork pads will no longer be produced. You may still be able to get them from Mad Fiber as they were able to contract with our source to use not only the compound we developed but also the unique shape we developed (at least this is what I have seen in their photos).

_________________
Zippy engineer

I can train anyday that I want with 85mm taiwan carbon clincher rims....and I can attest that they are a hell of a lot faster than 303's or 404's any day of the week. The windier... the faster.

Zipp's are overated...overpriced...and frankly....a waste of money in my opinion.

_________________
http://www.bobkestrut.com/images/1983worlds.jpg

Reynolds and Enve both have changed how their rims are made. In conjunction with their recommended pads, the heating problem has been reconciled. Zipp, Enve and Reynolds have all sorted this out.

-Eric

_________________
www.ergottwheels.com

Boy I'd love to hear how you quantify that.

-Eric

_________________
www.ergottwheels.com

@ Waldo

Can you clarify the 303 Firecrest line for me? The tubular rim shape 285v4 was out before the Firecrest name was used (2009). Under the "Technology" tab there is no mention of Firecrest like there is for the clinchers and both 404 tubulars and clinchers. Is there a new 303 rim shape coming out? The current 285v4 isn't modeled after the rest of the Firecrest rims.

-Eric

_________________
www.ergottwheels.com