Im using zip p 303 for all purpose ride. I was advise to get a climbing wheels like 101, frlcrum zero LE, or maybe notubes alpha 340. 303 is 45mm. Will lower profile wheel like 24mm helps and can climb better ? Please advise.

Alejandro Valverde used Campy Bora for nearly each stage in the Vuelta . And I think he climbed really well
So maybe the weight is more important than the depth of the rim

The lighter the wheel weight, especially at the rim, the more responsive the wheel will be to acceleration and I think that is important when you are going up hill. The easier it is to hold your momentum the better. The only place that I think deeper dish wheels have trouble is on downhill descents where crosswinds might catch the wheel. IMO the zipp 303 is a great all round wheel.

Zipp 303 tubulars are already manufacturer claimed to be a sub 1200 wheelset. You won't be getting any climbing improvements by going to other wheelsets, unless you spend a noticeable amount of cash on a sub 1000 grams wheels, and even then any (noticeable) gains would be questionable.

Sorry mine is a 303 clincher. Is the weight of the rims matter the most for climb or the profile of the rims?

That contradiction sums up why areo is more impostant than weight most of the time. You want to keep 'momentum' (you mean velocity presumably as momentum = velocity x mass), therefore a heavier wheel has more momentum and will carry its speed better, so small fluctuations in power output (i.e. imperfect pedaling) won't affect the consistency of your speed so much. The downside is they're harder to accelerate, but IIRC once of the manufacturers looked at the data for some tour stages and the added effort of accelerating heavy wheels Vs the same bike weight (i.e 2 bikes at the UCI limit, one with heavy aero wheels one with light wheels) during accelerations was a fraction of a watt on the average over a stage, the good areo wheels were ~10W.

That obviously ignores handling, where most people would agree lighter rims feel better (as long as they're stiff). And 'feel', it may only be a few watts, but if you're dragging an 808 through constant accelerations then it's going to demoralise you and slow you down even if overall you expend less energy than the next person.

I suppose one consideration is where in the buunch you sit. If your on the front constantly then the speed may be more consistent and the areo advantage greater, if you're yo-yo-ing off the back as the bunch strings out through corners then lighter wheels would cope with the accelerations better and you're less likely to be working in the wind?

Just thoughts, I've never raced and probably never afford (well, justify to the girlfriend!) the cost of some 303's!

If I recall aerodynamics of the rim profile begins to decrease somewhere around the 6-8% grade where lower weight begins to take over... so if you're doing a lot of sustained steep climbing then a lighter wheel will help a lot. If you're doing more rolling routes aerodynamics will help more... overall the 303 tubular (if it fits between your chainstays) is a great all around wheelset for just about everything... if you're thinking about going with clinchers unless you're a flyweight go with the 404 carbon clincher... theres only a ~20g weight penalty between the 303 and 404 carbon clincher and the 404 is arguably more aerodynamic.

Zipp 303 clinchers are lighter than Zipp 101 clinchers. They're also less than 50g heavier than Fulcrum Zeros. Sounds like the guy 'advising' you is fixated on rim depth without paying attention to anything else.

And for you, "what is better for climbing?" is a very vague and variable question. What kind of climbs? What kind of overall ride? What riding style? What do you want your wheels to do?

Is it the 303 firecrest carbon clincher or the older 303 alu rimmed clincher? Very different beasts. Latter was a wobbleboard, and not really a very good rim.

Spoon
At speeds of less than 20mph aero does not have that big of an advantage over a shallow rim. If you add to gravity on a climb, the heavy aero might not present any advantages. Alejandro used boras and got second, but Alberto used 202s and won.
Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2

Velverde also had difficulty matching accelerations time & time again. On steep gradients it's fairly clear that aero isn't as much of a factor as is inertia.

Whether Valv.Piti's inability to match accelerations is due to different doping regimins or due to wheel weights is another question.
He [Valv.Piti] did eventually catch up. Now, that may be to Contador not having raced for nearly the entire season and being not quite up to form. Or it may be due to having "aero" wheels. I think the former rather than the latter.

Also, this is weight weenies. Light is right.

_________________
Exp001

Zipp 303 are somewhere around 1500 grams. So if you would buy something lighter 1200-1300 grams it would be great.
And Valverde didn't lose on the mountains He lost falling in one of the first stages

But as @prendrefeu said . Light is right

All things being equal (ie weight), the the deeper section aero wheel will be faster in ALL conditions. Including steep climbs. The speed advantage will be greater the flatter things get.

Unfortunately, assuming you are talking about the same manufacturer/rim material/rim design, the deeper section aero wheel will weigh more than the shallower section "less aero" wheel. So you have the classic trade-off between aero or light weight.

A good example would be the Enve 6.7s vs the Enve 3.4s vs the Enve 1.25s.

At the speeds the PROS ascend "moderate" climbs (5-6%), the deep 6.7 wheels will be fastest. As the grade increases, speeds decrease, the aero advantage decreases, and weight factors in more. So at some point (we're just estimating %'s here), the PROS will find that the 3.4s will be faster than the 6.7s when the grade is, say, 7-9% and that something superlight but less aero (the 1.25s) are fastest when the grade is 10% or above.

This does not factor in "feel" or the ability to vary tempo on those grade climbs. A guy like Wiggins who climbs like Indurain (steady) will likely stick to these recommendations, while a guy like Contador who climbs like Pantani (huge kicks, change of pace) might favor a lighter, less aero wheel.

The trick here is that this is what works for the PROS, at PRO speeds. If you climb a 4% grade at 20mph like these guys do, then don't worry so much about the weight, and ride deep section aero wheels. You'll be faster. But if you're the average weekend warrior with an FTP at 3.5 W/Kg, then you can reduce all those percentages, because you will be climbing at a slower speed than the pros and thus the aero/weight trade-off shifts in favor of weight. So maybe you ditch the 6.7s for the 3.4s when the grade hits 4%, and find that the 1.25s are faster than the 3.4s when you're at 6-7%. That's the idea anyways - the slower you climb, the more you want to favor light weight over aero.

Of course, most rides involve flat sections and downhills - on all of those sections, your deep section aero wheels will be faster.

Finally, most climbing also involves descending, and descending often involves dealing with crosswinds, and sometimes gusty crosswinds. Some riders will handle these conditions without a complaint, others will find that high-speed descending on deep section aero wheels is a near-death experience... and if that causes you to grab your brakes to stay alive, you will lose time. So make sure you can handle your wheels of choice in a strong wind - if you can't, there's a good chance we will see them here in the Classifieds after a spooky session in the mountains.

_________________
R5 VWD | 2008 SRAM Red | Rotor 3D+ SRM | Zipp 101s/Enve 3.4s
S5 Team | 2012 SRAM Red | Rotor 3D+ SRM | Enve 6.7s
P3C | Zipp Vuka Aero/R2C | Omega | FSA SRM | Zipp 808/Super 9 Disc
T1 | Scatto | Rolf Prima FX58

could not agree more refthimos.

_________________
IRONMAN 70,3 TARGET TIME 03:55

Get a set of the new 202 clinchers... light, wide and aero.

_________________
R2.5 / R3 / S-Works 29er (20 lbs) / S-Works SL4 Di2 (14.7 lbs)