I’ve heard a lot of complaints in regards to the Flo disc due to it’s weight. I just looked it up…the total difference is 85 grams, that weight just about anyone’s pre-race dump. You upgrade the Flo’s to Ceramic Bearings and now you are looking at $699 bucks. Flo even states it has provided negative drag in tests.
Never ridden a disc and looking to make an upgrade…the Flo’s seems to be the best bang for your buck. If the main difference is the weight…then it is a no brainer. Can’t be that easy though.
So to those who have ridden the Super 9 CC and to those who have ridden the Flo Discs…what are your reviews? Difference in stiffness? Serious difference in ride?
Myself, Zippdisc is the bomb! Once you got it on your bike and your set your brake caliper to it, let your engine work and hold on… Worth every penny. As well, if you can get a second hand one you can convert it to eleven speed if needed…they don’t have an axle under 2012 to accommodate the eleven speed but you just need to mill out the back of the cassette for about $20.00 and you’re done…
Just picked up a Flo disc in this latest sale. A little bit heavier than the new Zipps, a wee bit lighter than the Hed. Half the price of the Hed disc and quarter the price of the Zipp disc for the same performance. No brainer, IMO.
Even a disc cover will be just as good as either disc. The Zipp disc is really great at lightening your wallet though, but who carries their entire wallet on rides?
Even a disc cover will be just as good as either disc. The Zipp disc is really great at lightening your wallet though, but who carries their entire wallet on rides?
After using my 2012 Zipp 808 FC with a wheel cover on the rear for 2 years I thought I was dialed in on the bike, but then got a screaming deal on a Super 9 and the speed boost I got was quite noticeable.
If I was starting my TT bike build all over again today I would get a Flo 60 front and Flo disk back, but there is nothing imo like an 808 front w/ latex+Supersonic 20 and Super 9 rear w/ latex+Attack.
Weeeeeell, for the same price as a Flo Disc more or less I picked up a slightly-less-than-perfect-visually-but-buggered-if-I-can-see-anything-wrong-with-it Renn 555, so I get the whomp for free (compared to the Flo). I do wonder why the Renn doesn’t come up more often in these discussions, it tends to be Flo vs Zipp vs Hed but if you want a disc that is a clincher with a proper brake track, and also want structural carbon for the whomp then it’s worth considering and new from the web page it’s not a huge amount more expensive than the Flo. Love mine.
So to answer a different question than the one you asked, I’d consider Renn.
PS: based on what I just read, the Renn is 65g lighter than the Zipp Super 9…!!
This question comes up every couple months on ST…all it boils down to is how much money you want to spend. You want a good deal…you get the FLO…you don’t care about money…you get the Zipp. There really isn’t that much more to it.
I have a FLO disc…love it…but would never spend the money on Zipp even if I didn’t love it.
Even a disc cover will be just as good as either disc. The Zipp disc is really great at lightening your wallet though, but who carries their entire wallet on rides?
After using my 2012 Zipp 808 FC with a wheel cover on the rear for 2 years I thought I was dialed in on the bike, but then got a screaming deal on a Super 9 and the speed boost I got was quite noticeable.
If I was starting my TT bike build all over again today I would get a Flo 60 front and Flo disk back, but there is nothing imo like an 808 front w/ latex+Supersonic 20 and Super 9 rear w/ latex+Attack.
Looks like the swap from covered to Zipp may have slowed you down. Maybe it was the confirmation bias of just having purchased such an expensive product. Best case scenario, your new Zipp disc was just a little slower? In any case, the change is so small that someone will not notice the extra speed in any case.
he got a super 9…there is no super 9 on that chart…i do agree though, you would be hard pressed to notice a speed change. I have a Super 9 too
Dang, maybe I was wrong. I looked up the Super 9’s data and plotted it on the chart for comparison. That thing is ridiculous and I’m sure that much of achange would be noticeable.
I would go with simpler and lower cost, so that would be flo. Weight is not a big factor. But one thing that does puzzle me: the big deep circular ridge on flo discs. Gotta wonder if that impacts aerodynamics. No structural discs as far as I know have that deep ridge, and you would think that the flo team would have been able to make for an essentially flat or lenticular disc.
