zipp 404 vs. mavic carbone

mavic carbone is ****. the rim isn't made from carbon, but from aluminium!!!!!!!!!!!

people told you not to train on the zipp because is is such a great wheelset., and is is very expensive. But is is so much better the Mavic....!

I can advice you to buy a very cheap wheelset for on the hometrainer, or for in the rain. Like a $100 wheelset or something. And keep that Zipp404 as new to get everybody's attention!! 🙂

THnaks. i have a set pf pro ritchey that came on the bike i was going to train on and use the zipps for racing.. i was trying to get a rim i could train on and race on all in one. i just didnt want to spend 1000$ on rims i was only gonna use a few times a year. i was told that the hubs would wear in about 1 to 1/12 seasons if i rode em all the time

That's not true. The bearings of the Zipp are the best on the market.

But it is wrong looking for 1 wheelset for both races and training. You must have 2 wheelsets, or better 2 bikes. One cheap for training and one for racing.

It's mainly a cost factor - the Zipps are as durable as any wheel built, and AFAIK, reasonably tough. However, if you're just out riding, and hit an unexpected pothole, a curb, or otherwise wipe out, do you want to do that on a $200 wheelset or a $1k wheelset? In training, getting there quicker really doesn't make much difference, so why put those expensive wheels at risk?

Don't get me wrong - I borrowed a set of 404's for an afternoon ride, and would love to own them, but that cost is too hard to swallow for someone that's not racing - too many other things that money could buy. The Vector Pro's I paid $250 for (used, admittedly) work just as well, and are a lot cheaper to replace if something bad happens.

Carbones are ****? With all due respect, I'd like to know what information this is based on. Granted, the name is a little misleading, but it's still been a favorite aero race wheel among crit racers, sprinters and flat stage specialists since it arrived on the scene. I've never used them, but I know plenty of racers who do, and love them. They're heavy, true, and thus not great wheels for the hills, but that hardly makes them junk.

And they're available at half the cost of Campy Boras.

Granted, Zipp 404s are venerable wheels in their own right, but let's not get rash in our characterization of other wheels without a little more explanation.

It is my understanding that Zipp has really done their homework following their initial growing pains, and they have really improved their wheels and bearings over the last 2-3 years. This being said, I feel it's safe to significantly discount experiences with the older models. I know a few people who've put over 2k miles on recent models without mishap. Now, if you are a 'Clydesdale' or if you are just going to take it out and beat on it constantly on rough roads, I suggest something like Mavic Open-Pro 32h or CXP33.

ok. I have seen and cycled on wheels from different brands.

I assume you don't want to spend like $10000 or something (then you just buy a few Z3/ADA's or 4 Bora's like in the Tour).

Are you a heavy rider or not? Something like 500gram weight-saving isn't sifnificant if you are over 70kg.

Are you a climber or not? Less weigth is always important (rotating energy of wheels), but;

when you are climbing weight is the really significant factor
when you are rinding on flat roads, aerodynamics is the s.factor.

Zipp404. 1270grams. 58mm rim. This wheelset is only for light riders! A special one is made for 'Clydesdale'. It is both very aerodynamic and lightweight. So you can use it for both TT and climbing. Over 65/70kg don;t buy it beacuse it is very flexi.

Zipp303. 1125grams. 30mm or something. Very light wheelset, but less aero. I prefer the 404 because it is only 150grams heavier, but much more aero.

Campagnolo Bora. 1320gram. 50mm rim. Very nice wheelset (I have one my one). This is a wheelset that gets a 'facelift' every 10-15years! Not every year. It is very stong and lightweight, has carbon hubs, G3 spokes. Clear-coated carbon! And you can use it for both TT and climbing. Tubes only.

Campangolo Hyperon. 1200gram or less. Low rim (25mm or something). Very very light and looks great! But much spokes and not aero. Weight difference with the Bora is only 120gram, so I suggest buying the legendary Bora.

HED Alps. 1600gram. 50mm rim. Aluminium rim-strip for braking
(- point). A little bit heavy. Much spokes, so less aero. Strong wheelset. Availeble for clincher.

HED Jet 60/90 very heavy wheelsets but very aero. I won't suggest buying the Jet90mm because you will crash with side-winds.

Mavic Carbone. Not made of carbon. 2kg!!!!!!!! 50mm Thats twice the 303/hyperon! Alu rim string (- point) It is strong and aero, but I think is is far too heavy. People who get free wheelsets from sponsors, don't care about this. They can get a 5kg bike without wheels, so with 2kg it is 7kg (UCI limit). 5kg+1200grams =6.2kg and that is beneath the UCI limit.

Spinergy Thilium. I don't know but it looks a bit soft..

Reynolds. Never had the, bit is looks great. Is doesn't have that carbon-look.

FIR Antara. something like 1500-1600gram. 58mm rim. Looks great. Alu rim strip (-). Bit heavy, but very very strong.

Fir SPeedlite. Almost the same weight but lower rim. So why don't buy the Anatara?

Self-build wheels like Mavic CXP33 are an other catagory. For $300 you get such a wheelset. It has 36! spokes and 35mm rim so it isn't very aero. It is made from alu and an wheelset weight over 2kg (with Dura Ace hubs, I had one pair myself).

I love the Bora's. Visit www.campagnolo.com for great photos. But there are enought other great wheels. I wouldn't suggest the Mavic Carbone!

I have the zipp 303's for racing on only. As someone said why would you run the risk of smashing up an expensive set of wheels? I have the old Mavic open pro 36 hole indestructos as training wheels, they are heavyish and slow but can take a &^%$^ pounding! when you get on the ZIPP's on race day.....well lets just say that you can seriously lay some power down

so im not a racer, but im a gear freak looking to expand my stable.

im attempting to do some triathlons and hoping for the ironman in 2006, so the right choice of gear can mean the difference between finishing and not finishing.

i understand that wheel aerodynamics/weight affect the ride, the speed, and the amount of power required at a given speed. given all that, if you can afford the wheels to maybe save yourself some energy and power as opposed to finishing X number of seconds faster than your competitor, then so be it.

here's what ive gathered about zipp 404's and mavic cosmic carbone's:

zipp 404 clinchers: alloy hoop bonded to a carbon body. 58mm rim, 18 spoke front, 24 spoke rear. claimed weight for the regular 404 set is 1712g, and the clydesdale set at 1775g (with 24 front/28 rear). straight pull sapim cx-ray spokes (strongest/lightest spokes) that are mounted on the actual carbon portion of the rim. 2005 version of the wheels are supposedly supposed to have the same dimples on the carbon surface that the 808's had.

mavic cosmic carbone sl: allow hoop with a "carbone" fairing (basically a carbon like or carbon based fairing). 50mm rim (rim + fairing), 16 spoke front, 20 spoke rear. 2005 claimed weight is 1765g. straight pull mavic flat spokes. spokes are actually mounted on the alloy portion of the hoop, not on the fairing.

given all that, hows about a comparison between the strongest zipp wheel (the clydesdale version) vs the mavic cosmic carbone? here's what i can gather from a small amount of research and hopefully a bit of sense:

the zipp's have a larger cross section, so faster at given speeds. if 2005 sets really have the dimples, perhaps theyll be even faster. more spokes on the clydesdale version == slightly more wind turbulance correct? i know that the carbon process is getting stronger every year, but spokes mounted in carbon vs aluminum still dont exactly give me complete confidence. i could be wrong. ive heard the zipps spin up quickly, but heard from a wheel builder that the bearings are sorta "thin" in the front.

the mavic's have a smaller cross section, so possibly slower/less aero at speed in that respect. less spokes == less wind resistance, but at the same time, possibly less strength than more spokes (i say possibly since it also depends on the rim strength and lacing pattern, etc etc). spokes are mounted in the alloy portion of the rim, with eyelets, so possibly stronger there..

so here's the question.. which is better? haha i know that seems like an endless conundrum, but we all want speed, expend less energy, but hell it doesnt hurt to have strength as well. pro or not, no one wants a wheel to fold under them regardless of what kind of race/ride theyre doing, cat 5 or cat 1.

as for my opinion, im leaning towards the 404's in every respect aside from the spokes mounted in carbon.

the other half of me is leaning towards the mavic's because of the spokes mounted in the alloy portion of the rim.

in terms of speed differences between 58mm and 50mm, im not sure. dimples would be nice though.

any thoughts?

marlon1 said:

mavic carbone is ****. the rim isn't made from carbon, but from aluminium!!!!!!!!!!!

people told you not to train on the zipp because is is such a great wheelset., and is is very expensive. But is is so much better the Mavic....!

I can advice you to buy a very cheap wheelset for on the hometrainer, or for in the rain. Like a $100 wheelset or something. And keep that Zipp404 as new to get everybody's attention!! 🙂

what do you think the 404 (clincher) rim is made of? 🙂

JohnO said:

It's mainly a cost factor - the Zipps are as durable as any wheel built, and AFAIK, reasonably tough. However, if you're just out riding, and hit an unexpected pothole, a curb, or otherwise wipe out, do you want to do that on a $200 wheelset or a $1k wheelset? In training, getting there quicker really doesn't make much difference, so why put those expensive wheels at risk?

I'm thinking about getting a set of Zipp 404 tubulars for everyday riding -- even though I'm not a racer. I've raced a criterium once but I'm not fast enough. I did hit 32.9 mph max top speed. The only reason I want them is that they''l make my 2003 Cervelo Soloist Team racing bike CSC Team authentic. And I'd use Tufo tires, tape, and sealant.

Well, I saw a set of Zipp 404 tubulars on sale on ebay with pothole damage - see the pictures! Both wheel rims were damaged by a pothole. Shows that these wheels aren't good for everyday riding unless you want to take the risk and always watch out for potholes. By the way, the damaged Zipp wheels sold for $531 on ebay.

I'm somewhat happy with my everyday racing / training wheels - Ksyrium SSC SL's with Vredestein Ricorso road tires. The Ksyriums took a 20 mph crash into a curb and still stayed true enough without any brake rub. If I get Zipp 404 tubulars I can only afford them at ebay prices. I think $1350 is too much for a set.

HMGOY said:

I jus t bought a set of zipp 404's. I was looking at the Mavic Carbone's also. I was told that I should only race on the Zipps (not train on them). I was also told that the Mavic's are very durable and I could have trained and raced on them.

I went with the zipps because they were a lighter wheel. thinking that it would be more beinficial on the hills than the extra weight fof the Mavic's

Does anyone have any feedback on the durability of hte zipps versus the Mavics?

I have raced the past few seasons on Mavic Carbones, and have a new set of Zipp 404's. Both are fantastic wheels and similar in cost, but the advantage definitely goes to the Zipps for a race wheel. The Mavics are just heavy. Once they are spinning at 25+ mph, they fly, but any time a hard acceleration is needed, they lag. The Zipps have all the aero advantage of the Mavics, but are not hindered by excess weight when it comes time to jump. I never used the Mavics in a RR with any hills, but the Zipps will get top priority for every race (if it's really windy, I'll probably run a Ksyrium front). The Mavics may seem more durable because they are heavier, but I doubt if they are. The Zipps are just brilliant. BTW - Get the Zipp brake pads. They last way longer on carbon rims and work just fine on aluminum.

BTW - Get the Zipp brake pads. They last way longer on carbon rims and work just fine on aluminum.[/QUOTE]

I hope your not doing that. The actual braking performance would be alright but your carbon rims will be cactus. Using brake pads on metal rims causes small flakes of metal to be caught in the pads. By using these same pads on your carbon rims you'd be scratching them to buggery. If you know anything about carbon then you'd realise that this is severely compromising the structural integrity of your wheels - theyre gunna cave in on you one day. Not meaning to be picky but just for your own safety.

rayner said:

BTW - Get the Zipp brake pads. They last way longer on carbon rims and work just fine on aluminum.

I hope your not doing that. The actual braking performance would be alright but your carbon rims will be cactus. Using brake pads on metal rims causes small flakes of metal to be caught in the pads. By using these same pads on your carbon rims you'd be scratching them to buggery. If you know anything about carbon then you'd realise that this is severely compromising the structural integrity of your wheels - theyre gunna cave in on you one day. Not meaning to be picky but just for your own safety.[/QUOTE]
A quick phone call to Zipp told me...
The Zipp pads are designed to work on both carbon and aluminum rims. A quick scrub with a Scotch-Brite (or similar) pad on the brake pads will be sufficient to remove any aluminum slivers before installing the carbon wheels.

Thanks for the heads-up, though. I'm glad I checked before making an expensive mistake.

sprintmonkey924 said:

I hope your not doing that. The actual braking performance would be alright but your carbon rims will be cactus. Using brake pads on metal rims causes small flakes of metal to be caught in the pads. By using these same pads on your carbon rims you'd be scratching them to buggery. If you know anything about carbon then you'd realise that this is severely compromising the structural integrity of your wheels - theyre gunna cave in on you one day. Not meaning to be picky but just for your own safety.

A quick phone call to Zipp told me...
The Zipp pads are designed to work on both carbon and aluminum rims. A quick scrub with a Scotch-Brite (or similar) pad on the brake pads will be sufficient to remove any aluminum slivers before installing the carbon wheels.

Thanks for the heads-up, though. I'm glad I checked before making an expensive mistake.[/QUOTE]

Suprised I don't hear mention of the new Carbone SLs for 2005 which are 15% lighter AND real carbon!!

That's interesting --- I went against my own line of thought, and bought a set of 404's in tubular from ebay in late September. And I'm just riding for myself, not planning on racing any time soon. They're fairly new, 2002 model, undamaged, and I paid $650 for them, including the Vittoria tires on the wheels, plus an extra set of Conti Sprinters. High end cycling gear on ebay gets cheap for a brief period in late September/early October.

Why did I get them? I always wanted to try out a set to see what all the fuss was about (as if anyone is foolish enough to loan a set of wheels like this), and figured I could sell them next spring for at least what I paid for them.

Been riding them a month now, and I'm keeping them. Aside from the speed advantage (about 1mph over my benchmark 20 mile loop), they completely eliminated my numb hands problem. When I rode the Rolfs, my hands were going numb after an hour or so, even with gloves. With the Zipps, I noticed no numb hands after an hour, so I repeated the loop and got in a 40 mile/18mph ride, hands not even tingling. I love these wheels!

I also noted that the Zipps seem to have a distinct advantage on downhills. Best I've done down a moderate grade in front of my house previously was 46.1mph. Second run with the Zipps turned in a 48.2, and I should break 50 soon - major milestone for me.

As for the potholes - if I'm not hitting potholes with a $400 set of Campy Zondas, I'm certainly not going to ride a set of $1300 Zipps into one. Most of my riding is on secondary roads near horse farms in KY, and they tend to keep those roads in excellent condition. No way I'd ride them in town, though. No advantage, and lots of risk.

JTE83 said:

I'm thinking about getting a set of Zipp 404 tubulars for everyday riding -- even though I'm not a racer. I've raced a criterium once but I'm not fast enough. I did hit 32.9 mph max top speed. The only reason I want them is that they''l make my 2003 Cervelo Soloist Team racing bike CSC Team authentic. And I'd use Tufo tires, tape, and sealant.

Well, I saw a set of Zipp 404 tubulars on sale on ebay with pothole damage - see the pictures! Both wheel rims were damaged by a pothole. Shows that these wheels aren't good for everyday riding unless you want to take the risk and always watch out for potholes. By the way, the damaged Zipp wheels sold for $531 on ebay.

I'm somewhat happy with my everyday racing / training wheels - Ksyrium SSC SL's with Vredestein Ricorso road tires. The Ksyriums took a 20 mph crash into a curb and still stayed true enough without any brake rub. If I get Zipp 404 tubulars I can only afford them at ebay prices. I think $1350 is too much for a set.

I have a 2005 Hed Jet 60 EX rear clincher (shimano) rebuilt with a zipp hub (shimano 8-10 cassettes) and black dt spokes (28 spokes riders to 225 lbs) This wheel is like new, less than 200 miles. Original hub cracked when pedal hit the spokes. Hed would not replace the hub. so i bought the wheel and had it rebuilt with a zipp hub.
$325.00 sent anywhere in the lower 48 $335.00 canada.
[email hidden]

HMGOY said:

I jus t bought a set of zipp 404's. I was looking at the Mavic Carbone's also. I was told that I should only race on the Zipps (not train on them). I was also told that the Mavic's are very durable and I could have trained and raced on them.

I went with the zipps because they were a lighter wheel. thinking that it would be more beinficial on the hills than the extra weight fof the Mavic's

Does anyone have any feedback on the durability of hte zipps versus the Mavics?

yep, certainly do. but first to address a couple of inaccuracies. 'carbone' is not misleading at all, Mavic is a French company, and 'carbone' is French for 'carbon'. Simple. A quick visit to Mavic's website and review of the Caosmic Carbone SLs would also have corrected you that indeed made of carbon. However, I write this wholly independently of the question since I ride Cosmic Carbone Ultimates (and think about that one - you do not get £2.5k wheels which are not carbon!). However, I used to ride the SLs and they too are great wheels and I rode those for several years and the durability is not a question. Superb. I have tried out friends' bike with Zipp 404s and, they produce a nice ride too, but somehow do not have the French pzazz. I despite this, I used mine in all seasons - as I do with the Ultimates - and they avoided using the Zipp's in pretty much any adverse weather, although I do not know what might have happened if this did! Hope this answers some of your questions.
Scott Addict Ltd.

It's been five years since this thread started, and Mavic's rear hub design still sucks.