Cycling Equipment · Public discussion

Zipp 340 vs. Zipp 303

Started by zencycle · · Last activity · 5 posts · 506 views

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Cycling Equipment
Published
27 July 2007
Last activity
29 July 2007
Original author
zencycle
Posts
5
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
506
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–5 of 5
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. I've been offered a set of NOS zipp 340s (ok, a few miles on them).
    The 303 is allegedly the next generation of the 340? I've been told
    the rims are the same. Is there a real difference here? Being the
    skeptical curmudgeon I am, I can't see Zipp changing the model number
    because some one at corporate was bored. What _did_ change?

  2. Zipp changes the layup of their rims all the time even if there
    *isn't* a change in the outer shape and/or model #. The current 303
    rims are 44mm deep, and are heavier and stronger than the previous
    38mm 303s. The 340s are quite old and I'm sure they have little in
    common with the new 303 rims. For one thing, the tension limit was
    80kg on older Zipp rims (now 100kg), so that should give you some idea
    of their strength. The new shapes are also more aerodynamic.

  3. On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 10:40:28 -0700, Ron Ruff <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:

    Zipp changes the layup of their rims all the time even if there
    *isn't* a change in the outer shape and/or model #. The current 303
    rims are 44mm deep, and are heavier and stronger than the previous
    38mm 303s. The 340s are quite old and I'm sure they have little in
    common with the new 303 rims. For one thing, the tension limit was
    80kg on older Zipp rims (now 100kg), so that should give you some idea
    of their strength. The new shapes are also more aerodynamic.

    Some older Zipp rims had the spoke holes drilled straight out, not
    offset, which puts a bad bend in the spokes. I had a rear wheel that
    was often breaking spokes and think that was the cause.

    --
    JT
    ****************************
    Remove "remove" to reply
    Visit http://www.jt10000.com
    ****************************

  4. On Jul 28, 12:28 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:

    Some older Zipp rims had the spoke holes drilled straight out, not
    offset, which puts a bad bend in the spokes. I had a rear wheel that
    was often breaking spokes and think that was the cause.

    I've heard that is true also, but there are other rims on the market
    today that are center-drilled. Bending the spoke near the nipple so
    that the nipple is better aligned with the hole solves this problem.

  5. On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 23:23:40 -0700, Ron Ruff <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:

    On Jul 28, 12:28 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:

    Some older Zipp rims had the spoke holes drilled straight out, not
    offset, which puts a bad bend in the spokes. I had a rear wheel that
    was often breaking spokes and think that was the cause.

    I've heard that is true also, but there are other rims on the market
    today that are center-drilled. Bending the spoke near the nipple so
    that the nipple is better aligned with the hole solves this problem.

    It mitigates the problem.

    --
    JT
    ****************************
    Remove "remove" to reply
    Visit http://www.jt10000.com
    ****************************

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.