In Reply To:
BTW, as a data-hound, did the published aerodynamic drag numbers convince you to go with this wheel, or just a deep wheel and this seems like a good deep wheel? The published numbers of deep wheels compared to the tri-spoke convinced me to go deep. Zipp sure seems to have hit a home run with the 808 as far as "deep while still having good handling qualities", so, I Zipped it!
Did the anecdotes regarding less steering force in windy conditions hold any sway? After hearing just such a report from someone I trusted, without really knowing for certain if it was true, I took the chance....add my anecdotal evidence of less steering force, compared to a tri-spoke, into the archives.
Clincher? Yep, I read some of those reports, too. I think for time trial applications, clinchers at least aren't measureably worse than tubulars.
Just wondering about your thought process re: this wheel.
It's a subjective decision, of course. In the end, I went with Zipp because I was pursuaded by their literature that they had done their homework, and that the wheel will do for me in the real world what I expect from it. I don't worry about handling issues since I weigh 158 pounds and have a bike with a long wheelbase.
I went with clincher because (a) I have a clincher rear race wheel, (b) I don't want to invest in tubies and spares, (c) clinchers roll as fast as most tubulars, and faster than many, (d) I can change a clincher as fast as a tubie, and (e) Zipp actually built a wheel designed for clinchers.