808 rear, 404 front (or similar depths) - how would these clinchers feel to climb on?

[Shrike]

Looking to simplify my wheelsets and thinking about going 808/404 clinchers for my best set for really long distances. Stravistix reckons I spend a third of my time climbing so worried that this setup will feel sluggish. I have 404 tubs which climb beautifully, and 202 tubs which are dreamy but think selling them both on for the 808/404 clinchers which are better suited for my needs. 'Needs'.

Is the 808 going to be a ridiculous drag?

For comparison, the rear 808 clincher is 1000g, and the 404 tub is 840g.

808/404 clinchers would be a bit over 1700g.

[FIJIGabe]

That number for the 404 tub sounds off. Zipp lists the wheel as 665g for the current version.

Personally, I don't think it will climb well. I think you're looking to add a bunch of weight, and if you're climbing, the 404's are about as big as I'd go (for reference, this is what I have on my Madone 9).

[Shrike]

665g for the front tub yeah. But going from 404 rear tub to 808 rear clincher would be +160g. Maybe wording wasn't clear earlier.

Front would be +45g (404 tub 665g to 404 clincher 710g).

So total gain of 205g.

205g doesn't sound like a lot for a more aero setup with better peace of mind on the really big distance stuff.

But maybe it'd feel dead on the rear. Just never ridden anything that deep before.

[FIJIGabe]

Yeah, most of the additional weight would be in the back rim, where you absolutely LEAST want it.

[AJS914]

Adding the aero to the rear wheel doesn't seem to be worth the weight penalty. An aero helmet or handlebar would probably yield a larger benefit.

[Marin]

No idea how it will feel but 205g heavier wheels will slow you down exactly as much as 205ml more water in the bottle.

[alcatraz]

What's your average speed on one of these common rides that you do?

If it's sub 25km/h then I'd stay on 404s/303s, if it's over 30km/h with room to go higher then I would look at 808s.

Climb or no climb, the 808s come alive at speed.

The front wheel sees the greatest aero savings so maybe 808/808, otherwise you'd be investing over 1000$ per watt saved. I understand crosswinds can be an issue.

[Shrike]

What's your average speed on one of these common rides that you do?

If it's sub 25km/h then I'd stay on 404s/303s, if it's over 30km/h with room to go higher then I would look at 808s.

Climb or no climb, the 808s come alive at speed.

The front wheel sees the greatest aero savings so maybe 808/808, otherwise you'd be investing over 1000$ per watt saved. I understand crosswinds can be an issue.

It’s over 30kph on the longest most hilly routes on a windy day. I would love to run 808/808 but there are some downhills along A roads with a lot of lorry traffic and it can be pretty hairy when they pass. I’m prepared for it these days and handle it as good as can be expected but in my imagination a front 808 would be like a sail! Could be wrong, but no way to test to find out.

My goal is to get my average speed up on big distances and will be training towards that too.. just not a fan of crappy feeling wheels when climbing

[alcatraz]

You'll be faster on 808/808 than 404/404.

If weight is a concern you can part with zipp and use some lighter deep options. Zipp 808s are 82mm deep.

You can get chinese tubulars 88mm that weigh 1500gr.

I take the weight penalty of deep wheels riding alone on longer rides and I'm not afraid of climbing. Sure I won't PR on climbs but I will save time on the whole ride overall. What is more important to you? Optimize for one section or the whole ride?

If you absolutely want a weightweenie 88mm wheelset you can build a tubular one around 1400gr, clincher around 1600gr.

[wintershade]

I've ridded my 808s a few times on hillier routes. Normally they stay on the TT bike, but I wanted extra practice handling them on windy days but felt like riding a road bike. You do feel the weight, but one thing not to discount is the wheel is significantly stiffer than the 404. Felt like what was lost to weight was gained on stiffness/efficiency.

Depending on your comfort with a deep front wheel, you might consider a 808/303 set. Or save some weight and do a tubular 808, and kind of split the difference on weight?

[Shrike]

Thanks guys, slight change of plans, no longer looking for a deep wheel set for the road bike. Got a TT bike so will just get super deep rims for it next year and will find something that feels nice and light for the road bike. Best of both worlds I guess.

[youngs_modulus]

Yeah, most of the additional weight would be in the back rim, where you absolutely LEAST want it.

What is it about the weight being in the rear rim that makes you cringe like that?

[elzilcho]

Yeah, most of the additional weight would be in the back rim, where you absolutely LEAST want it.

What is it about the weight being in the rear rim that makes you cringe like that?

My thoughts exactly. I don't have data to back it but this seems coutner intuitive. More weight in the rear while climbing would bring the center of mass back, helping keep weight over the rear tire and maintain traction.

[Shrike]

Did end up buying an 808 clincher rear (for a TT build) but will be trying it on the road bike too to see what it climbs like, will report back for posterity but might be a few weeks, arm broke at the moment.

[youngs_modulus]

Yeah, most of the additional weight would be in the back rim, where you absolutely LEAST want it.

What is it about the weight being in the rear rim that makes you cringe like that?

My thoughts exactly. I don't have data to back it but this seems coutner intuitive. More weight in the rear while climbing would bring the center of mass back, helping keep weight over the rear tire and maintain traction.

Hmmm. That's an interesting idea, but the additional weight is so miniscule (compared to system weight) that it won't make a measurable difference in climbing traction (which would only matter in the rain on slick roads anyway). So if FijiGabe is worried about anything substantial, it's not that. I'm curious about what it actually is.