View Single Post
Old 06-03-2016, 08:22 PM   #6690
604CEFIRO
Mr.Spahkle, So BLING it hurts!
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: richmond
Posts: 4,658
Thanked 515 Times in 232 Posts
Failed 0 Times in 0 Posts
^ I will disagree with the above.

I have the Zipp 60's. They are the new version of the old 404's, have dimples, a carbon ferring and alu brake track.

I have also owned Zipp 404 firecrest full carbon as well, for a short period of time. I sold them, and bought the Zipp 60's instead because the firecrest's braking performance was pure dog shit.

The Zipp 60's brake tracks are alloy and performance is spot on regardless of weather. And you can be confident that you can drag the brakes indefinitely downhill without the fear of your clincher tires blowing off the bead in 35*c+ weather. I bought the 60's because I've never trusted carbon wheels in high heat (ex// Penticton Fondo, Levi Fondo), I've seen enough of my friends blow beads and warp their carbon wheels

Sure, the wide profile of Firecrest's are marginally better in cross winds, but in real world performance, I never feel like I'm getting blown to bits. I'm 150 lbs soaking wet.

I ride the 60's for everything... Crit racing, hill climbs, fondos, flats, high heat etc. I don't find them heavy.

300-400 grams extra, that is less than 1lb difference between the 60's and the full carbon firecrest's.

Go take a piss and a dump and that's about the weight difference.

Now if you're talking Firestrike, that's a bit different.

[edit]

Obviously u can see I favor aluminum brake tracks lol. But to clarify i do like to ride hills and rollers so for descending I favor braking performance over being lightweight

Quote:
Originally Posted by swttl View Post
hey guys

looking at upgrading my wheel set to the zipp 60, thoughts on these?

thanks

Last edited by 604CEFIRO; 06-03-2016 at 08:58 PM.
604CEFIRO is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by: