ZIPP 808 vs Reynolds DV 46 C UL

I borrowed my friend's set of Reynolds DV 46 C UL. Intended to ride during training and see how it will respond and suited for IMJ's rolling terrain.


The wheels are carbon clinchers - which makes it much lighter than aluminium clinchers and looks like tubular wheels. Comes with DT Swiss hubs which apparently are world renown. The rim depth is, of course, as the model name suggests, 46mm deep. I am no technical and mechanical guru. What I think of the wheels are only my sense as a rider.


I run my own pair of ZIPPs 808 aluminium clinchers, which weigh a ton as compared to the Reynolds (actually, it is 1.9kg vs 1.4kg). But sets of wheels have their own advantages and now I truly understand why some triathletes own different sets of wheels.


The difference between the 2 wheel sets? They both cater to different needs. The Reynolds clearly is meant for climbing because of its light weight. ZIPP obviously to maintain high speeds. When I first started on the Reynolds on a 100km ride, I found that they transformed my heavy bike into feather weight. I was unable to get the wheels to respond while pushing for higher speed on flat terrain. Although the rim depth was not very deep, the stability of the bike was compromised in cross winds. But when I did a second run with the wheels on a 175km ride, I started to appreciate the loss of 0.5kg to ride up slopes. Where I use to switch to small chain ring to climb, now there was no need any more. It was amazing how shedding 0.5kg will help on climbs.


The ZIPPs are fantastic to power up to speed on flats. The best part was that they will maintain at that pace with easy strokes, although it will take effort to get them up to speed. I will think that the weight had much to do with this effect? After all, momentum is mass x velocity? And this will probably be true with disc wheels as well? The discs are well over the 1kg weight category?


As to whether the hubs are smoother on the ZIPP compared to Reynolds? I got the feel that the former had smoother hubs. The rolling on the ZIPP simply felt superior. In terms of aerodynamics, I would think that ZIPP wins hands down with the toroidal shape versus the Reynolds v shape. I suppose there is a reason why ZIPP has been the top brand in many of the ironman races?


But having said all these, each serve different applications. Whether one is truly better over the other will not be a fair comparison. My take is, the ZIPP will be great for high speeds with more stability (ignoring heavy cross winds) and Reynolds be great for climbs. Can there be a compromise? I suppose ZIPP 808 tubulars will be the way to go then? With almost equivalent weight as the Reynolds. However, I have yet to try these out. Plus, I am not a tubular convert.