# Reynolds SDV66 vs. Zipp 404



## teffisk (Mar 24, 2006)

Both would be clinchers. They are pretty close to the same weight. So the question is about the rest of the wheels. Is there really a lot of advantage to having an all carbon rim or would the hastle of different brake pads out weigh it? I don't know much about hubs and spokes, so which is better and how much do they matter? And the big question is how aero one wheel is over the other. The Reynolds is obviously deeper, but it seems to be the concensus that Zipps rims are more aero. So would a less deep Zipp rim offer the same advantage as the deeper Reynolds without some of the cross wind effects?

Thanks


----------



## rruff (Feb 28, 2006)

Important info... what are you using it for? Will you be swapping to wheels that have an aluminum brake track? 

You are picking nits as far as speed is concerned. You might consider the FP wheels/rims if you are on a budget.


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

I will be getting a set of SDV66 on the road this season. The front is ready to roll, but I'm waiting on a rear hub. The build quality of Reynolds rims are top notch. Any impact that will damage that carbon clincher will surely dent the alloy braking surface of a Zipp clincher or similar so the overall durablilitt of the rim shouldn't be a concern. The aerodynamics of each wheel haven't been tested side by side so no definitive answer there, but I would predict similar results between the two with the deeper rim having an slight advantage (just a guess).

Both use hubs of similar quality. Some have had bearing issues with Zipp, but I think most of those have been sorted out. They both use good bearings.

I dont think either wheel set will let you down.

-Eric


----------



## scubad (Jun 22, 2004)

I had a pair of Zipp 404's and just purchased a set of Reynolds MV32's. I have a pair of SDV's on order. I sold the 404's to pay for the SDV's. All of these wheels were clinchers. This is what I did and now here's the justification.

1) I wanted a pair of strong light wheels for climbing and when the wind is blowing. Hence the MV's.
2) I test rode a pair of SDV's and I like them better than the 404's. Lighter and seemed stiffer. Could be due to the shorter spoke length. I won't debate the technical aspects of the wheels here.
3) I am somewhat of a large cyclist. I had issues with denting the aluminum rims of the 404's. This happened on rough railroad tracks. I know this happened twice since I was in a large group and I blew out a tire when I hit the tracks. Hence two blown tires. We should have slowed to cross the tracks but they came up on us in a hurry. The rims were damaged but it was mainly cosmetic. 
4) One problem that I had was with the freehub body, it developed grooves or indentations from the torque from the cassette. I guess this is fairly common occurance. It happened more on the Shimano body but still happened on Campy just not to the same degree.
5) I really like the concept of a solid carbon rim rather than a carbon rim bonded to a carbon fairing or aluminum rim to a carbon fairing.

One thing to note, the braking on the aluminum Zipp rims is better than on the Reynolds MV32 rims. I like the looks of both wheels and probably like the Zipp's look better since it's a little more glossy rather than the flat look of the Reynolds. I like the engineering of Reynolds and I will post a review once I get the SDV's. I know that Reynolds has a huge demand and their production got caught off guard. I ordered beginning of Jan and still waiting. It seems the DV's and MV's are more readily available.

Both are great wheels. 

Enjoy 
ScubaD


----------



## teffisk (Mar 24, 2006)

Thanks, cool review Scubad. I will be using the wheels for most only racing.


----------



## gitoutdaway (Nov 28, 2007)

I've had Reynolds Stratus DV;s for the last 3 years, I like them alot but they feel much much flexier than MAvic SSL's that I also run on the same bike. The Mavics feel much more solid under power than the Reynolds which have a bit of squish. I weigh about 160-170 and I'm 6'1 so I dont think I;m putting THAT much muscle on them, I chalk it up to the skinny spokes on the Dv;s that probably flex under modest amount of torque. This was very dissapointing to me initially but I've gotten used to it, though I use the Mavics far more often for this reason despite that I like the Reynolds for their looks and engineering. Also, I am worried about changing a flat on the Reynolds too (all carbon clinchers) and consider myself lucky I havent flatted on them yet.
Can;t say much about Zipps


----------



## goneskiian (Jan 13, 2005)

scubad said:


> One problem that I had was with the freehub body, it developed grooves or indentations from the torque from the cassette. I guess this is fairly common occurance. It happened more on the Shimano body but still happened on Campy just not to the same degree.


I am so completely fed up with aluminum cassette bodies that this happens with. I have 2 PT SL's that I have just recently switched to their steel cassette body from the lower end PT. I got sick of it taking 15 minutes to get the cassette off. 

I guess it's not a huge deal unless you change out your cassette's often. I like to be able to put a big dinner plate 27 on the back for hillier races and then swap back to a smaller one if it's jut rollers. I also use wheel covers for TT's (so I have the PT to look at). 

Sorry for the rant. Just wanted to say I feel your pain.

Oh yeah, and to keep it on topic, I've got 404 clinchers that are getting a little old and am considering the SDV's as replacements so I'm also interested in some reviews when folks start riding them.

Cheers!
-Ian


----------



## bradford (Sep 15, 2007)

ScubaD - how are the SDV-66's?


----------



## 11.4 (Mar 2, 2008)

I find the SDV-66's (I have been riding both clinchers and tubulars) are supremely stiff rims, beautifully done, but they are laced up in configurations in prebuilt Reynolds wheels so the net result is a bit less responsive than I prefer. Do consider having a custom builder do the wheels in a slightly stronger lacing pattern (not 16/20, but perhaps 20/28 or 24/28) and you get an extremely rigid, extremely durable wheel with all the benefits of this great rim. Eric who posts on this site regularly (www.ergottwheels.com) can do a beautiful pair of wheels for you and it probably won't cost more than the stock wheelset from Reynolds. You can get it with the same DT hubs if you want, even, and you can upgrade or customize spoke choice at will. Highly recommended.


----------



## power1369 (Mar 17, 2003)

*Reynolds rims*

Can you actually buy Reynolds rims separately or with different spoke hole configurations? I have never heard of SDV66s with anything different than 16, 20 or 24 hole rims. Does this apply to DV46s as well ?

Thanks


----------



## rruff (Feb 28, 2006)

Reynolds will do custom hole counts on the rims... no extra charge.


----------



## bradford (Sep 15, 2007)

Thanks for the input, I really hadn't considered a custom spoking pattern. I'm currently riding some Vuelta CarbonPro 50mm wheels @ 12/16 - but with really large spokes if you haven't seen them. Upgrading for TT purposes mainly, but would also like something a bit stiffer as I'm ~180lbs. Really trying to decide between the 808s and SDV66s. I hear so many good things from people that have Zipps around here, and don't think I've seen anyone on a Reynolds carbon wheelset - 46/66 deep.


----------



## 11.4 (Mar 2, 2008)

bradford said:


> Thanks for the input, I really hadn't considered a custom spoking pattern. I'm currently riding some Vuelta CarbonPro 50mm wheels @ 12/16 - but with really large spokes if you haven't seen them. Upgrading for TT purposes mainly, but would also like something a bit stiffer as I'm ~180lbs. Really trying to decide between the 808s and SDV66s. I hear so many good things from people that have Zipps around here, and don't think I've seen anyone on a Reynolds carbon wheelset - 46/66 deep.


When I bought my first carbon wheel I bought a Zipp for the same reason, despite the fact that the builder was recommending Reynolds and thinking that Edge might become something really nice as well. You get nice woven carbon weave cosmetics and a well-marketed name. Now if you go to Reynolds you get unidirectional carbon (the woven carbon layer is primarily cosmetic -- if you hear complaints about Reynolds or Edge cosmetics it's primarily because they put all the grams in their rims into unidirectional carbon, which shows the seams and folds more than the woven stuff). You get smaller spoke holes (in Edge's case, ones that are actually molded into the rim) so there's less of a weak spot for the spoke to tear through. You get what many users feel is a more robust rim at a lower weight. Talk to some of the custom wheelbuilders around here and although they have all brands of custom rims available, it's the Reynolds and Edge that they are favoring. Also, Zipp hubs are at times slightly problematic -- some people have no problems, other people have more, and in the past they were quite deficient. You have to give Zipp credit for working through their problems, and they are now starting to use internal nipples like Reynolds and Edge, but Zipp isn't necessarily the best rim or wheel out there. They just market really well. SRAM now owns Zipp, which is somewhat fitting because SRAM is a superb marketer as well -- witness all the problems with SRAM Red rear derailleurs, front shifters, and chainrings that don't get the bad press they would if they came from Shimano. Anyway, unless you're in a fairly sophisticated equipment market with a lot of different retailers selling the highest end equipment, most of what you'll see is Zipp. And most of the Reynolds you see isn't their top line but rather a level below, so it's posed as a cheaper version of Zipp. Check out Reynolds and Edge. I think Edge has an edge over Reynolds for sheer quality, but they are both superb, Reynolds offers more in complete wheels, and and both are superior to Zipp. (By the way, there are two Edge rim manufacturers; the one you want is Edge Composites in Utah.) OK guys, flame on.


----------

