Frontwheels for TT: Zipp 808 faster than Flashpoint 80, or not?

Triathlon Forum
1

Which front wheel is faster: Zipp 808 Clincher or Flashpoint 80?

Both wheels have the same rim dimensions and the same 18 spokes.

Pro Zipp 808:

  • Dimples
  • Better hub
  • Lighter (80-90gram)

Pro Flashpoint 80:

  • Internal spoke-nipples
  • Cheaper

Is there any windtunnel data to compare these two wheels? Will the Zipp 808 outperform the Flashpoint 80 due to the dimples? Or will the 80 compensate it with the internal spoke-nipples? Somebody has a clue?

I am looking for a new front wheel for a TT bike. The Flashpoint front costs 630 dollar and the Zipp front costs 1035 dollar at the same online shop.

2

All things being equal, the Zipp will be slightly faster. But you’ll be paying about $1000/sec of time differential.

3

All things being equal, the Zipp will be slightly faster. But you’ll be paying about $1000/sec of time differential.

What he said.

If you like the most bling-for-the-buck get the Zipp, but if you want to be frugal and put your extra $$$ in to the next upgrade, get the flashpoint.

4

although this doesn’t answer you question. If your open to the possibility of the Hed Jet 90 it is $625 and 85 grams lighter than the 808 clincher.

5

All things being equal, the Zipp will be slightly faster. But you’ll be paying about $1000/sec of time differential.
Have you seen the data? Given the same hub and spokes, they have to be exceptionally close. If the 808 is faster, that means dimples are more meaningful than internal spokes, yeah? I personally haven’t seen any data, so am interested.

6

All things being equal, the Zipp will be slightly faster. But you’ll be paying about $1000/sec of time differential.
Have you seen the data? Given the same hub and spokes, they have to be exceptionally close. If the 808 is faster, that means dimples are more meaningful than internal spokes, yeah? I personally haven’t seen any data, so am interested.

But they don’t have the same hubs and spokes.

7

no… i haven’t seen any data. But according to Zipp’s website internal/exposed nipples don’t make any differece at all.

The only difference between the two would be dimples, hubs and weight. Which, will probably add up to a hadfull of seconds over an ironman depending on course and conditions.

But… it would be an expensive handfull.

8

All things being equal, the Zipp will be slightly faster. But you’ll be paying about $1000/sec of time differential.
Have you seen the data? Given the same hub and spokes, they have to be exceptionally close. If the 808 is faster, that means dimples are more meaningful than internal nipples, yeah? I personally haven’t seen any data, so am interested.

But they don’t have the same hubs and spokes.

They do if you choose to build them with the same hubs and spokes, and that’s what I’m wondering about. Rim section v. rim section, is there a measurable aerodynamic difference?

9

All things being equal, the Zipp will be slightly faster. But you’ll be paying about $1000/sec of time differential.
Have you seen the data? Given the same hub and spokes, they have to be exceptionally close. If the 808 is faster, that means dimples are more meaningful than internal nipples, yeah? I personally haven’t seen any data, so am interested.

But they don’t have the same hubs and spokes.

They do if you choose to build them with the same hubs and spokes, and that’s what I’m wondering about. Rim section v. rim section, is there a measurable aerodynamic difference?

I see. So you’re asking if dimples or internal nipples are faster with everything else on the wheel being the same. Eh, who cares? Go get a 1080 and have dimples AND internal nipples!

10

All things being equal, the Zipp will be slightly faster. But you’ll be paying about $1000/sec of time differential.
Have you seen the data? Given the same hub and spokes, they have to be exceptionally close. If the 808 is faster, that means dimples are more meaningful than internal nipples, yeah? I personally haven’t seen any data, so am interested.

But they don’t have the same hubs and spokes.

They do if you choose to build them with the same hubs and spokes, and that’s what I’m wondering about. Rim section v. rim section, is there a measurable aerodynamic difference?

I see. So you’re asking if dimples or internal nipples are faster with everything else on the wheel being the same. Eh, who cares? Go get a 1080 and have dimples AND internal nipples!
I will when I can get a clincher version.

11

All things being equal, the Zipp will be slightly faster. But you’ll be paying about $1000/sec of time differential.
Have you seen the data? Given the same hub and spokes, they have to be exceptionally close. If the 808 is faster, that means dimples are more meaningful than internal nipples, yeah? I personally haven’t seen any data, so am interested.

But they don’t have the same hubs and spokes.

They do if you choose to build them with the same hubs and spokes, and that’s what I’m wondering about. Rim section v. rim section, is there a measurable aerodynamic difference?

I see. So you’re asking if dimples or internal nipples are faster with everything else on the wheel being the same. Eh, who cares? Go get a 1080 and have dimples AND internal nipples!
I will when I can get a clincher version.

This guy has one!

12

I will when I can get a clincher version.

The Clincher is now available from zipp: ST_Thread

13

totally sweet.

14

Shameless Plug:

Clincher 1080’s are NOW IN STOCK at Las Vegas Multisport. Call 702-367-1786 if you want to order a pair.

15

I am told that the Flashpoint and the Zipp uses Sapim CX Ray spokes and both uses 18 spokes front. What’s the difference, brandonecpt?

Why does the zipp 1080 have internal spoke-nipples when they don’t work?

Does anybody have real data about the 808 vs 80?

The 1080 is not an option because the debate is about the 82mm high rims. We can start it when the flaspoints will have the flashpoint 100 in 2009…

16

I believe the flashpoints use sapim 4.0 mm bladed spokes and the zipps use sapim CX Ray spokes.

Why does the zipp 1080 have internal spoke-nipples when they don’t work?

–in the absence of data, perception of aeroness is king.

17

I am told that the Flashpoint and the Zipp uses Sapim CX Ray spokes and both uses 18 spokes front. What’s the difference, brandonecpt?

Correct, I just looked at the Flashpoint site, FP’s now have Sapim spokes as of 2008. I must have only seend versions from pre-2008.

EDIT: Looks like the PF’s are built with Sapim CX, Zipps are built with Sapim CX Ray…from what I can tell.

18

They do if you choose to build them with the same hubs and spokes, and that’s what I’m wondering about. Rim section v. rim section, is there a measurable aerodynamic difference?

Or if we’re building an FP rim up we could consider the effect of choosing a smaller diameter hub, like the M5 (or even an AC) - would likely supersede any slight shape differences or dimples in the rim. Would have to consider bearings too though.

19

Why does the zipp 1080 have internal spoke-nipples when they don’t work?

Do you have some data that they don’t work? I’d love to see it, because internal nipples are a pain in the @ss.

20

on Zipp’s site they mention that internal nipples show no aero benefit and are a PITA - so they kept them exposed. Until, apparently, the 1080… which I am betting has internal nipples for manufacturing reasons and not aero reasons. Josh will have to answer that one for sure.

To the OP… is it really that important??? I mean, the difference between the dimpled rim and non-dimpled is just a few seconds. If you’re really, really, really serious about squeezing every second out of your performance - get the 808’s, or better yet, Zed Tech. If you’ve got a few bucks to spare, but don’t have a trust fund -the Flashpoints give you almost all the bang for a lot less buck.

If you want quantifiable data on exactly how much faster an 82mm deep rim is with/without dimples… i don’t think you’re going to find it. Why would Zipp publish that info when they would just be canibalizing themselves with the results.