Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 42
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    824

    2.1 Neomoto vs 2.35 vs 2.25 Racing Ralph. Have you compared tires?

    My 2008 Brodie Mettle fits a 2.1 Neomoto in the rear. I am glad I don't have to go down to a 2.0 quasi moto, since I prefer a bit more volume. In fact, I am hoping I can run the 2.35 Neomoto instead of the 2.1. How much bigger is the 2.35 Neo vs the 2.1? My bike won't fit a 2.25 Racing Ralph 650B. Is it possible the 2.35 Neomoto is inbetween the 2.1 Neo and the 2.25 Racing Ralph? I could only use the 650b Racing Ralph 2.25 if I did some mods on my bike.

    Also, the tire dimensions chart that shiggy has shows the volume being larger with the 2.3 neo vs the 2.1. Is this true? I thought I read that the casings were the same with the Neo's and even the Quasi.

    thanks in advance for any feedback,

    Last edited by morkys; 11-18-2012 at 07:17 AM.

  2. #2
    Doesntplaywellwithmorons!
    Reputation: DeeEight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,581
    Kirk says the casings are the same but whether panaracer actually produced them as such would be the question. Also all of shiggys tire data is several years out of date and it doesnt look like he has the time to update the info now that he runs titus.
    I don't post to generate business for myself or make like I'm better than sliced bread

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    824
    So the treads are just bigger on the 2.35? I compared the width of an unmounted Neo 2.1 vs the quasi and they are the same, meaning, the casings are the same. I am just finding that the 2.1 Neo seems like a smaller tire than I expected. It's like it's got slightly less cross sectional volume, size and overall height above the rim than the 2.1 of 26" tire it is replacing. I am trying to go to a tire that is similar in cush as my 26" tire. I guess it's hard to do that when I've barely got any room. I am going to compare with larger 26" tires.

  4. #4
    NedwannaB
    Reputation: JMac47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    8,722

    Apples to Oranges!

    Quote Originally Posted by morkys View Post
    So the treads are just bigger on the 2.35? I compared the width of an unmounted Neo 2.1 vs the quasi and they are the same, meaning, the casings are the same. I am just finding that the 2.1 Neo seems like a smaller tire than I expected. It's like it's got slightly less cross sectional volume, size and overall height above the rim than the 2.1 of 26" tire it is replacing. I am trying to go to a tire that is similar in cush as my 26" tire. I guess it's hard to do that when I've barely got any room. I am going to compare with larger 26" tires.
    What are you really trying to achieve? I know it's easier to cut to the chase and ask curent but if you've done any search/research on this you'd have some info. You really can't compare an unmounted tire to another. Rim width size, tire compound and tread design come into play. From my personal experience and investigating, the 2.1 Fire XC is the smallest casing/overall height tire. Knobs are a little wider then on the Nev's but fit better being back behind the chain stays (obviously dif in frame model applies). Meaning the Quasi is a big/true 2.0 if you will. Now the Nev's on the other hand aren't as big as they appear. Maybe smaller casing-bigger tread then the Pacenti's that appear to make the difference.

    Point being from what I've seen the RR2.25 won't be coming in under the Neo 2.3 by much if that's what you're looking to hear.
    Last edited by JMac47; 11-17-2012 at 06:23 PM. Reason: typo
    Wait,who did he tell you that?....

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    824
    I was actually hoping the opposite. I was hoping the 2.3 neo is inbetween the 2.1 Neo and the 2.25 Racing Ralph. I am hoping that despite being larger than the 2.1, the 2.3 Neo could fit on my bike. I am looking for the biggest 650B tire that fits my bike.

    I was hoping the 2.3 neo is noticeably slightly bigger than the 2.1 and yet smaller than the 2.25 Racing Ralph. One thing I noticed is that my 2.1 x 26" nev is big compared to older tires I have around like pana smoke and velociraptor 2.1's. I guess I want a tire with the same height off the 650B rim as the 2.1 nev on my 26" rim. Maybe I don't have enough room. You can see pics on the compatible 26'er thread. Maybe for my purposes, for the rear at least, unless I modify the frame, the best I can do is install a larger 26" tire.

    In fact, I am wondering what other tire out there is slightly larger than the 2.1 Neo but smaller than the 2.25 Racing Ralph. If the 2.3 Neo doesn't fit, perhaps something else will.
    Last edited by morkys; 11-18-2012 at 07:19 AM.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    824
    Does anybody have pictures of the 2.1 Neomoto vs the 2.35 and/or the 2.5 Racing Ralph side by side and/or mounted on a bike showing clearance? Comparisons of other tires?

    Here is the photo I posted in the 26'er compatible thread showing limited amount of room I have left.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 2.1 Neomoto vs 2.35 vs 2.25 Racing Ralph. Have you compared tires?-2.1-nevagal-26-vs-2.1-neomoto-650b.jpg  


  7. #7
    NedwannaB
    Reputation: JMac47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    8,722
    Got it. I guess what I was trying to say was I didn't think the RR was much bigger then the 2.1 Neo.

    I personally don't have a RR or 2.3 Neo, but do have WTB 2.2 Wolverines, Neo 2.1's, Nevs in 2.1's and a 2.35. Thinking the Wolv may be the only bigger tire if you're looking for more volume/lower rr but have to believe its close to the RR in size.

    I have a Wolv and Nev 2.35 on front wheels that I could take pix and send for comparison, later after riding.
    Wait,who did he tell you that?....

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    824

    My goal highest volume/cush 650B tire. At least match 2.1 nev 26" unless I mod bike.

    Sure, what the heck. I admit that looking at the fit, there isn't much room, so I doubt I can find a 650B tire much bigger than the 2.1 Neo and still fit in there without mods to the bike. Maybe I am at a dead end in terms of getting a 650B on the rear of my bike with at least as much volume/cush as my 2.1 nevegal 26" (I don't mind the nev as a tire but I find it slow rolling).

    I neglected to measure the height above the rim of the 2.1 Neo vs the Ralph vs my 2.1 nevegal 26". I suspect the 2.1 Neo has the least, the 2.1 Nevegal a bit more and the Ra Ra 650B the most.

    People keep saying that the Pacenti tires are all on the same casing and it's the knobs that make the size different. Wouldn't that mean the tire volumes are identical?

    Also, I notice that the rims/wheels that I look at for 650B are usually around 26 to 28 mm width. I ride xc so 35 mm rims are not necessary. Is there any difference between a 26 and 28 mm rim when it comes to tire fit? Does that 2 mm difference result in a difference in tire height and or width in practice?

    thanks for the feedback,



    Quote Originally Posted by JMac47 View Post
    Got it. I guess what I was trying to say was I didn't think the RR was much bigger then the 2.1 Neo.

    I personally don't have a RR or 2.3 Neo, but do have WTB 2.2 Wolverines, Neo 2.1's, Nevs in 2.1's and a 2.35. Thinking the Wolv may be the only bigger tire if you're looking for more volume/lower rr but have to believe its close to the RR in size.

    I have a Wolv and Nev 2.35 on front wheels that I could take pix and send for comparison, later after riding.
    Last edited by morkys; 11-18-2012 at 09:24 AM.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,146
    What about a Kenda Nevegal 2.1 650b? You won't fit a Neo 2.35 if a RR 2.25 is a no go. I just installed a RR 2.25 in place of a 2.3 Neo and it looks like a size smaller. You really can't compare 26, 27.5 or 29" tires same sizes seem to run different even from the same manufacture.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    824
    The 2.1 nevegal could be used as a temporary option if it has the same or larger casing height as the 2.1 x 26 nevegal. It's not the best rr wise, but it's not too heavy. Also, I think it can be modded to have better rr if I'm not mistaken.

    I could be mistaken comparing the 2.1 x 26 nev with the 2.1 Neo. It may be an illusion and/or I am just being pessimistic. It is possible that the 2.1 Neomoto may actually be as tall as the 2.1 x 26 nevegal. I guess I will have to get a 650B wheel again and compare.

    Quote Originally Posted by JMac47 View Post
    ...I personally don't have a RR or 2.3 Neo, but do have WTB 2.2 Wolverines, Neo 2.1's, Nevs in 2.1's and a 2.35. Thinking the Wolv may be the only bigger tire if you're looking for more volume/lower rr but have to believe its close to the RR in size...
    If you could get a picture of those two tires on wheels and/or compared to the Neo 2.1, that would go a very long way. The WTB 2.2 could be an option that has as much cush and volume as the 26 x 2.1 nev but is hopefully a bit smaller than the RR 2.25...and I'd like to see where the 2.3 Neo compares to both. The WTB is a nice option bc it's supposed to have ok rr and it's not too heavy.

    Curious about all 650B tires...

    Ro Ro 2.1 and 2.25
    NN 2.25 and 2.35

    The 2.25 and 2.35 Ro Ro, NN or Ra Ra could work as my front tire but not for back. Possibly though, the Ro Ro could work in the back if fits but is larger than the 2.1 x 26 nev in case height cush etc. I am narrowing down my options. Narrowing the field, zoning in, and yet winter is coming and riding dirt will soon be over for a few months.
    Last edited by morkys; 11-18-2012 at 05:45 PM.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,146
    2.2 Wolverine is a HUGE tire - larger than a 2.3 Neo-moto. Of all the 650b tires I have run the Racing Ralph 2.25 650b was the smallest, Neo 2.3 was definitely larger. If a RR won't fit you will probably be limited to the smaller 2.1 sizes.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    824
    Quote Originally Posted by keen View Post
    2.2 Wolverine is a HUGE tire - larger than a 2.3 Neo-moto. Of all the 650b tires I have run the Racing Ralph 2.25 650b was the smallest, Neo 2.3 was definitely larger. If a RR won't fit you will probably be limited to the smaller 2.1 sizes.
    Bummer. Ok. Maybe the Rocket Ron 2.1 is a bit bigger than the 2.1 Neo.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    824
    I suppose even if a 2.1 Neomoto 650B tire had slightly less cross-sectional area than a 2.1 x 26" nevegal the 650B tire could feel the same or better in terms of cush because it has the same or larger volume and also has more tire between the rim and ground because of the slightly larger footprint.

    Still, the bigger the 650B I can use, the more options I have.

  14. #14
    Dissolved member
    Reputation: StiHacka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,625
    Quote Originally Posted by morkys View Post
    Also, I notice that the rims/wheels that I look at for 650B are usually around 26 to 28 mm width. I ride xc so 35 mm rims are not necessary. Is there any difference between a 26 and 28 mm rim when it comes to tire fit? Does that 2 mm difference result in a difference in tire height and or width in practice?
    It will but the difference will not be a drastic one. OTOH, I run a 2.3 Neo on a 17mm inner width rim in the front and a 2.1 Neo on a 22.6mm wide Flow in the rear, and the difference is massive. The 2.1 feels rounder and meatier than the "limp" 2.3 in the front. That said, I am expecting a new Velocity P35 rim to arrive at any moment now.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,146
    Tubed or tubeless ? Rim width ? Want to add cush run a Neo tubeless. I thought the Neo 2.3 felt too stiff running a tube. If you run a wider rim you can increase the volume and increase the foot print.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    824
    So between 24, 26 and 28 mm rims, there will be a difference in the ultimate size of the same tire? I guess it depends also on the internal width of the rim, where the tire seats.

    I am not looking to do tubeless since I'll be swapping around so much over the winter to see what works for me and any mod I have done.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3,263
    The neo 2.3 has less cush than the 2.1 as it has a thicker sidewall. The Neo 2.1 is not bad cush for it's volume. Not on par with Geax tires but is smoother riding than the Ra Ra.

    The wider rim will increases the height of the tire. The Crest decreases the height as it lets the sidewall bulge out more.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    824
    Ok, so a 24 mm rim won't make the tire higher or wider than the 26 and 28 mm rims? I thought I heard somebody mention that a narrower rim makes the same tire taller and a wider rim makes the same tire wider.

  19. #19
    NedwannaB
    Reputation: JMac47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    8,722
    Quote Originally Posted by morkys View Post
    Ok, so a 24 mm rim won't make the tire higher or wider than the 26 and 28 mm rims? I thought I heard somebody mention that a narrower rim makes the same tire taller and a wider rim makes the same tire wider.
    Basically a skinnyerr rim rolls the crown of tire more, wider rim flattens it out. Would have to be a significant difference in widths to really see a change in height.

    You should just get a 2.1 Nev and roll with it. A lot of analyzing going on for minimal mm's of cush!
    Wait,who did he tell you that?....

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3,263
    Quote Originally Posted by morkys View Post
    Ok, so a 24 mm rim won't make the tire higher or wider than the 26 and 28 mm rims? I thought I heard somebody mention that a narrower rim makes the same tire taller and a wider rim makes the same tire wider.
    I used to think that as well. My P35 makes the same tire 1mm taller than a Blunt which is 1mm taller than in a Crest. The tire in P35 is also 2mm wider than in the Blunt with a flatter crown. The tire in the Crest is wider than in a Blunt.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    824
    Yeah, I am analyzing it, but it's bc I want the biggest tire I can fit. I am probably going to start out with a 2.1 Neo actually, maybe a 2.1 nev...but eventually I want the biggest tire I can fit in there. It should be an adventure trying to mod my seat stay to accommodate up to a 2.35-2.4 x 650B tire. A 2.35 is probably good enough though.

    I also noticed that the inside width of the various rims are not all exactly what you'd expect. I can't yet find the dimensions of the new American Classis Terrain, All Mountain and Race rims, but, according the Bike Radar, they are:

    Terrain 650
    External 26
    Internal 22

    All Mountain 650
    Ext 28
    Int 24

    Race
    Ext 28
    Int 24

    Oddly, they are all the same as the 26" and 29" rim equivalents, except on the American Classic website, the 26 and 29 All Mountain list the internal rim width as 23 mm which is not the same as the 24 mm that Bike Radar states. Who knows if there really is a difference or if somebody made an error.

    Anyhow, I guess I would have decided between the All Mountain or 650 BXC set which I am guesing should be similar to the DISC TUBELESS rims of 26 and 29 which are 26 mm external and 21 mm internal. The 650BXC are 24 mm external though.

    So I don't know the internal width of the rims that come on the 650 BXC wheel set. Oh well, it is what it is. I guess I just chose a rim/hub/wheel setup based on cost, weight and strength and go with it.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    824
    Quote Originally Posted by gvs_nz View Post
    I used to think that as well. My P35 makes the same tire 1mm taller than a Blunt which is 1mm taller than in a Crest. The tire in P35 is also 2mm wider than in the Blunt with a flatter crown. The tire in the Crest is wider than in a Blunt.
    Ok, so the P35 is obviously 35 mm wide, and the Blunt should be 25 mm wide. How wide are the crest rims?

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jetboy23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,223
    Velocity is renaming some rims to span Blunts in 3 sizes. Blunt 35 (35mm), Blunt (28mm), & Blunt SL (25mm). I think the Stan's Crests are 24.4mm.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    824
    Any chance a Rocket Ron 2.1 or even a 2.25 would be BIGGER than a Neomoto 2.1 but smaller than a Racing Ralph 2.25 or 2.3 Neo, WTB 2.2 etc?

  25. #25
    Dissolved member
    Reputation: StiHacka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,625

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •