Originally Posted by
bet1216
I think it is important to qualify comparisons when discussing statements like sluggish uphill with deep carbon rims. Compared to what? For example I a set of shallow aluminum Mavic Askium's that came with a bike with some middle of the road tires and cheap butyl tubes (now just collecting dust on my wall because I don't ride them at all anymore). However, I did ride them a few times. I also have a set of Zipp 404's with latex tubes and Conti 5000 tires. The Zipps are extremely more responsive than the Mavics. The Aluminum wheels are the sluggish wheels when compared to the Zipps. The Zipp combo weights 300-400 grams lighter too. The Zipp hubs roll better, the latex and conti 5000 also roll better. The zipps at 58mm depth fly up hills and a significantly better "ride quality" compared to the shallow aluminum rims. However, that doesn't necessarily hold true for all wheels. Back in the day I had set of Mavic Helium aluminum wheels that rolled very nice and also were great climbers. Not the most robust wheel though. I would take the 404's over them any day as an all rounder.
I don’t really consider 404’s deep carbon wheels. I feel like they are a good sweet spot in terms of depth and weight. I have an 808 wheelset and a Boyd 90mm wheelset that I use on the velodrome. I consider those deep carbon. Depth like that is perfect for the track because mass start events always begin at about 15mph or more and the wind issues are not as severe. I couldn’t imagine climbing with either set. Compared to wheels in the 50mm range, they are boat anchors in terms of weight.