BTW, i have no personal experience with any of the sealants , do they really work?
Cielo by Chris King Cross Racer
Weight, stiffness similar to other clinchers on the market? Probably.
Is the 202 likely more aerodynamic than those in the same weight class, particularly with a 25mm tire? Probably.
I agree that I wouldn't drop the money on this particular product but it makes sense for Zipp to finish the line off and offer a low profile clincher that is lighter than their 101.
I raced the 404 FCs at some very tough road races this year- Morgantown RR (which has 4 steep descents that are all quite long with lots of switchbacks) and Battenkill. I also trained on them on very steep/tricky descents in WV during the winter. Not a single blow out. Use the right pads, don't be super fat, and know how to brake. Pretty god damned easy.
If you're flatting every ride or every other ride you're either an idiot or doing something wrong. Plain and simple. I've lived in flat prone areas and a tubular will glass puncture just as easily as a clincher. Ride in the gutter too much or ride tires that are too thin and you'll puncture. Sure, tubulars pinch flat less and are technically safer on descents in theory. Practice is another thing and varies with the person.
Most top line manufacturers make their performance clinchers and tubulars with the exact same rubber, plies and casing.
That one gets sewn shut and one gets beads has nothing at all to do with flat resisting...
Now let's get back to zipp bashing and see if someone can come in and repeat the "issues" they "know" about from reading repeated posts first generated a decade or so ago...
- Posts: 5428
- Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 4:43 pm
- Location: Wherever there's a mountain beckoning to be climbed
Perhaps, but I am not sure about that. Tubular tubes are ensconced on all sides in a nice controlled environment. Inner tubes for clinchers are not. Maybe that makes a difference in flat propensity.CharlesM wrote:That one gets sewn shut and one gets beads has nothing at all to do with flat resisting...
I'm going to guess at 2 things based on the ride. First, the rim portion of these is a little lighter than past Zipp FC clinchers taking a depth / size into account... The set isnt super light but they're not heavy by any stretch for clinchers of this size ( they came in lighter than spec at 1328 Grams for the pair). The MOI feels a lot like a couple of sets of hoops closer to 1200's rather than 1300's gram wheels. Second, they're a stiffer than my past 202's and 303's and the ride quality is roughly the same as the 303's. That stiffness is likely down to the hub geo and I havent taken a spoke gauge to them yet but the spokes sound a little higher than last versions.
These are not effected by cross winds at all. They're basically like riding a set of open pro's in that regard. And I'll guess that when I take these for a tunnel comp that the Aero properties are some place similar to 303 or 404 of 2 versions ago...
Braking on all the Firecrest wheels is very good relative to virtually all carbon wheels. It's getting so that with the newer pad compounds that they're not much of a downgrade in the dry and Zipp have heat sorted better than most...
I still think most folks just find it easier to ignore that Zipp have changed the hubs a couple of times in just the last 3 years. It's much easier to repost past 3rd hand speculation as if it's new info than it is to actually have any info. It's the same case with the rims as well. It's not just a shape change for firecrest but a materials and structure change across the line and the hoops themselves have gone through several running changes for existing models and applied to the next ones.
NealH wrote:I think this is the wheel Contadore is riding a the Veulta (or whatever the name). Nice looking wheel but, given its weight and the fact its carbon I would rather have the DA 7900 C24 in a heart beat. Virtually the same weight and with aluminum brake surfaces and no weight limit. I already have two pair of the 7850 C24 wheels and they are outstanding. Zipp needs to get this wheel down to 1200 grams.
Hey, hey - sorry if my comment turned this thread into a tubbie vs clincher debate - I was just trying to corral the earlier comment that this may be the wheel Alberto is using.....just try'n to keep facts straight - not cause World War 3
I do like an earlier comment about just appreciating what others choose to ride....... but in my case clinchers SUCK Uh Oh - I did it again!!!!
btompkins0112 wrote:I would like to clarify my statement.....I ride clinchers; HOWEVER, if I was going to drop 3k on a wheelset it would be tubular 100%......doesn't make sense to me to spend that kind of dollars on a 1350gram carbon clincher.
I agree. I never recommend them (except for TTs)... but some people want them anyway. People with money who don't race and like the look.
If you want the ultimate road racing wheels then you want tubulars... light and aero. If you don't race, then the small aero improvement and usually weight detriment of carbon clinchers over aluminum rims isn't worth the $$$ for most.
- Posts: 8609
- Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:32 pm
- Location: Los Feliz, Los Angeles, California
It's a matter of cost effectiveness, reliability, and availability.
- Similar Topics
- Last post
- 197 Replies
- 14722 Views
Last post by BobbySweeting
Fri Dec 29, 2017 3:47 pm
- 0 Replies
- 537 Views
Last post by Shrike
Fri Nov 17, 2017 10:08 am
- 0 Replies
- 453 Views
Last post by TSJ
Thu Sep 21, 2017 8:55 pm
- 38 Replies
- 4322 Views
Last post by CBJ
Sat Oct 28, 2017 12:08 pm
- 10 Replies
- 1155 Views
Last post by Marin
Thu Nov 02, 2017 8:13 am