# Zipp 404 Firecrest



## Jimmy Rixon (Oct 31, 2009)

Has anyone seen these?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRnTTCax8uw&sns=em 

What do you think? There's a thread on Weenies, thought I'd see if anyone had some info.

Thanks,

Jimmy

P.s. My first post! I must confess to a fair bit of lurking....


----------



## MarshallH1987 (Jun 17, 2009)

i haven't heard anything about them yet but that video made me want to have a seizure and punch somebody in the face really hard.


----------



## ewitz (Sep 11, 2002)

Zipp finally acknowledges that they need a full carbon clincher to be competitive.


----------



## natedg200202 (Sep 2, 2008)

I usually hate Zipp products, but this one is interesting. I can't see myself using Tubular tires, but the best option for performance (aero and durability) are with tubular rims. With this carbon clincher, they offer the same profile and performance of the 404T, at least in aero terms. 

The big obstacle for them is the pricing. They just seem to be way off with their lineup of wheels as far as price when you consider Edge Composite.


----------



## bwhite_4 (Aug 29, 2006)

natedg200202 said:


> I usually hate Zipp products, but this one is interesting. I can't see myself using Tubular tires, but the best option for performance (aero and durability) are with tubular rims. With this carbon clincher, they offer the same profile and performance of the 404T, at least in aero terms.
> 
> The big obstacle for them is the pricing. They just seem to be way off with their lineup of wheels as far as price when you consider Edge Composite.


How much more aero are tubulars than clinchers if the wheel has the same profile? I would think the difference would be very minute (unless Zipp is exaggerating wind tunnel testing). I'd think strength/durability would be the only difference since you wouldn't have the carbon mold bonded to the alum brake track. 

Either way- Edge wins.


----------



## ewitz (Sep 11, 2002)

bwhite_4 said:


> I'd think strength/durability would be the only difference since you wouldn't have the carbon mold bonded to the alum brake track.
> 
> Either way- Edge wins.


The wheels being discussed are new full carbon 404's. No alu brake track.

As far as strength/durability vs. the Edge we will have to wait and see. But I can't see Zipp waiting this long and not having a product that is competitive in evrything but price.


----------



## bwhite_4 (Aug 29, 2006)

ewitz said:


> The wheels being discussed are new full carbon 404's. No alu brake track.
> 
> As far as strength/durability vs. the Edge we will have to wait and see. But I can't see Zipp waiting this long and not having a product that is competitive in evrything but price.


My comments regarding alum versus carbon break track were about aero benefits - which I doubt there are any.

Unless they've changed their manufacturing process, I doubt the wheels are any better (other than being lighter). Just more hype for Zipp. They are good at building hype.


----------



## steve_e_f (Sep 8, 2003)

Hype sells. There will always be those that do their own homework and select the superior product on their own. The rest of the world just wants to be told what to buy and feel secure in their decision. For some, that has a tangible value as well.


----------



## wankski (Jul 24, 2005)

wont be as good as edge unless they go full carbon AND internal nipple.

latter is more of a problem than the former.


----------



## macedeno21 (Dec 30, 2009)

talked to our zipp rep about 2 months ago regarding these but I have never seen anything regarding them until now, the 404 full carbon clincher wheelset with weigh in at around 1050g according to him with a 202 and 303 model in the works as well. With regards to the braking surface, zipp developed a resin (similar to eastons thermotec) that helps to dissipate heat while not compromising the hook of the rim. I think that the wheel would be a complete winner if it was tubeless compatible as there is a large amount of potential in the technology.


----------



## ph0enix (Aug 12, 2009)

MarshallH1987 said:


> i haven't heard anything about them yet but that video made me want to have a seizure and punch somebody in the face really hard.


Seriously! How annoying!


----------



## spiffomatic (Jan 28, 2010)

macedeno21 said:


> the 404 full carbon clincher wheelset with weigh in at around 1050g according to him with a 202 and 303 model in the works as well.


Interesting, but 1050g sounds a little too light to be true for a 404 set that's clincher, even if it's all carbon.


----------



## ewitz (Sep 11, 2002)

spiffomatic said:


> Interesting, but 1050g sounds a little too light to be true for a 404 set that's clincher, even if it's all carbon.


Even Carbonsports Lightweight Standard III C come in at 1,080g for the pair (495g front, 585g rear). Can't see the 404's coming in lighter.


----------



## wankski (Jul 24, 2005)

just about to say the same.... 1060g is edge 45 TUBBIE (not 58) + cxrays + tunes....

if true, 1050g for 58mm carb clincher is a pretty great leap, and worth zipp being late to the party on this one...


----------



## backinthesaddle (Nov 22, 2006)

1050g will never happen. The bead has to be built up to accept the clincher tire. Rims are purported to weigh 400g, which will put the wheelset weight between 1300-1400g.


----------



## natedg200202 (Sep 2, 2008)

macedeno21, I'm thinking you swapped a '0' and a '5' and that the weight you were trying to type is 1,500 grams. 

I hope. At any rate, I want me some of that FireMonkey technology!


----------



## Zen Cyclery (Mar 10, 2009)

MarshallH1987 said:


> i haven't heard anything about them yet but that video made me want to have a seizure and punch somebody in the face really hard.


Haha. Posts like these are what make RBR such a good time!


----------



## natedg200202 (Sep 2, 2008)

*zipp announcement*

http://www.zipp.com/wheels/404-carbon-clincher#

No word on price from this page.


----------



## mjdwyer23 (Mar 18, 2009)

$2700. What problem do these wheels solve? Are they ever going to work on their spoke nipple engineering?


----------



## backinthesaddle (Nov 22, 2006)

1560 grams? For $2700? I can buy a full assortment of WIlliams or Boyd wheels to suit every occasion. Zipp missed it on this one.


----------



## mjdwyer23 (Mar 18, 2009)

Not to mention Edge Composites... definitely a "me too" product.


----------



## MCF (Oct 12, 2006)

For $500 less you can get custom Edge 45C with CK/WI/Elf/Alchemy hubs and weight difference is negligible....but the Zipp's are deeper.


----------



## rruff (Feb 28, 2006)

You mean the Edge wheels would be ~200g lighter...


----------



## MCF (Oct 12, 2006)

200g lighter for 45C with Elf/Alchemy or WI hubs? Dang, that is substantial...and $500 less!


----------



## rruff (Feb 28, 2006)

Actual weights for Edge 45 clinchers with Alchemy hubs and 20f 24r run 1290-1330g. So more like 250g lighter. 

Zipp has a pretty good rep for aerodynamics, but I don't understand the shape of this rim at all. Something with flatish sides and abruptly rounded ends cannot do a decent job of preventing flow separation at the trailing edge.


----------



## spiffomatic (Jan 28, 2010)

I don't know what they're specifically claiming, but keep in mind that the trailing edge becomes a leading edge at the "aft" portion of the rotation. Maybe that's a more relevant creator (or reducer) of drag since, especially after it leaves the rear wheel, there's nothing left to disturb the flow...


----------



## rruff (Feb 28, 2006)

Sure, but a nicely tapered shape works fine as a leading edge too. And without a tapered trailing edge I don't see how the shape could be called "aero". It's going to dump the airstream at the trailing edge just like a shallow rim. 

I'm also not getting the 25.5mm width at the brake tracks... are we supposed to use really fat tires with these? Don't know about y'all, but I run narrow tires on the TT bike because they have less drag and are faster overall. 

My semi educated guess is that these wheels will have greater aero drag than a set of XR300s with CX-Rays and narrow tires. The video they have up where they tested with a rider aboard doesn't give me a warm feeling either... you can't accurately determine wheel aero differences when you have the variable of a rider thrown in. 

It will be cool to see what the independent tests show.


----------



## Wines of WA (Jan 10, 2005)

That flat shape at the top of the rim probably has to do with handling a variety of wind angles. 

As explained to me regarding Hed rim shapes, which are similar as noted in this thread earlier: In a straight-on wind, a more standard triangular shape is fine because there is less turbulence at the top of the pointy shape. But in a cross-wind, that pointy triangular shape causes a large area of turbulence on the leeward side of the rim. Blunting that pointy shape eliminates much of that turbulent air volume by allowing the air to slide down the leeward side of the rim instead of forming a large pocket of air there. 

Hed talks about this in terms of producing a rim that "stalls" less. If you've ridden deep rims in hard cross-winds, you know what stalling feels like. It's a time when your aero advantage becomes a disadvantage and you feel like you're pedalling through sand.


----------



## rruff (Feb 28, 2006)

Hed rims are similar to this? If so then they must have made a recent change. Hed and Zipp have held the patent on the *toroidal* rim shape for years, and that one seems to work well. The Firecrest isn't toroidal though... it approximates a flat plate (a very fat one) with rounded ends. This is not a low-drag shape. Without a tapered trailing edge that allows some delay of flow separation you'll just create low pressure turbulence at the trailing edge (ie suction in the wrong direction).


----------



## Wines of WA (Jan 10, 2005)

The current model Hed Jets do have a very blunted shape. I'm not sure about torroidal or not, but the top is not pointy.


----------

