http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=2382
http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/2004/tour04/tech/?id=zipp
http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=2384
.
Let’s just wait and see.
I read the article and looked at the rim cross sections. The writer states that, until now, no one has made a rim like the second picture. Is that true? Last winter, I bought a deep section wheel from a guy on ebay. I talked to the guy on the phine and he told me that he used to work for Hed and this was a prototype wheel they built several years ago. It has no logos on it, but it looks like the second picture (obviously I can’t see a cross section of my wheel). I don’t know whether or not this was a story, he told me this after I bought the wheel. All I can say is, it’s pretty light. I’m not travelling in Tyler’s universe, though (I think I can, I think I can, I think I can).
Let’s just wait and see.
You don’t think that he’s going to use 'em?
So, can anybody figure this out: is the rim (without the tire) 81 mm deep as stated here or 60 mm deep as stated in another article in a previous ST post?
yes the new zipp wheel is all new. What you bought was a Hed Deep. The thing that is different about the new Zipp is that is has the dimples and is the first front wheel to be made with those dimples. Its not the first front wheel to havea deep crosssection. Also, the shape of the rim is designed to allow air to flow more smoothly over the surface as opposed to the HED Deep you bought last year. The new zipp uses the shape of the tire to guide airflow.
jeremyb
I think he’s talking about the claims on time savings over traditional wheels. The pictures are nice and all, but I highly doubt that the flow actually looks like that on the wheel at any section. Even the outermost section in supposedly “clean flow”. Just like when you drop a rock in a pond and the waves propogate outwards, disturbances propogate upstream in flow.
Who knows how they came about their estimations. If they measured the drag without the wheel spinning, then I would definitely question them.
And I don’t see how the tire helps with “guiding” the flow over the wheel. It’s no more integrated than in the 404. The difference is that they took out the flat section in the 404, making the deep section look more like an typical airfoil section. But there’s still seperation from the tire, it’s just less.
So, as cerveloguy said, we shall see.
Who knows how they came about their estimations. If they measured the drag without the wheel spinning, then I would definitely question them.
Marketed by the same people who brought us the Z-series ceramic bearing $3,000 wheels…