Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 51 to 58 of 58
  1. #51
    Harmonius Wrench
    Reputation: Guitar Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,210
    Quote Originally Posted by jncarpenter
    I don't understand this at all...I ran the 2.25 for over a year & recently mounted up the 2.4 to the same rim...both tubeless. There is NO comparison! The 2.4 is HUGE! Far bigger than my 2.25.
    What's not to understand? The point being made here is that there is a variance in casings and weights. Same as other tires I suspect, but for whatever reason, the Ardent 2.4"er seems to be the poster child for research on mtbr.
    Riden' an Smilin'
    Guitar Ted

    Blog
    RidingGravel.com

  2. #52
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,515
    Quote Originally Posted by Guitar Ted
    I have a pair of 2.4" Ardents.

    Tubeless it has done much better. On a Velocity P-35 rim, I am getting 60.2mm width, or 2.37" width. Close, but still not as wide as a Racing Ralph with a tube! Running a tire tubeless will stretch it more because the casing doesn't have that extra support from a tube. That is the only way these Ardent 2.4" tires will ever get close to 2.4 inches.

    I am not going to harp about the Ardent 2.4"er not being 2.4 inches wide. Heck- most tires are not what they say they are for width. But in the case of this Ardent 2.4"er, it is woefully undersized. They would have been better off calling it a 2.3"er, and even then my tubed example was barely that. (I've snce converted it to tubeless as well)
    Update from a February 18th post on G-Ted's Blog:

    Those Ardent 2.4"ers are plumping up! Like a Dubuque HotDog, they are pretty swollen from their original size. I'd guess they are actually approaching the 2.4 inch status. Amazingly enough! The best part is the ride though. I have them set up tubeless and they are really rolling nice and smoothly!

    Seems a bit of euphoric distance from the "woefully undersized" comment.

  3. #53
    Harmonius Wrench
    Reputation: Guitar Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,210
    Quote Originally Posted by BruceBrown

    Seems a bit of euphoric distance from the "woefully undersized" comment.
    The stretch from the Ardent 2.4"ers tubeless is nothing short of amazing, Bruce. But..........they have to be set up tubeless on a wide rim.

    If I mount these on 28mm wide rims, I lose some of my width. If I mount them up with tubes?

    Fagedda Boud It. No way they come close to 2.4 inches.

    So it depends on set up entirely. If you run them with tubes on an average width rim, yeah.....woefully undersized. Not everyone will have the luxury or need to use these on such wide rims or will want to use them tubeless.

    Thanks for bringing that up. It was a point that needed clarification.

    I am super pleased with them so far as a tire for those who are looking for a tubeless tire set up on a wide rim for purposes of max air volume with a tire that looks to have some decent traction. Now that the trails are on their way to drying out, I'll find out soon.
    Riden' an Smilin'
    Guitar Ted

    Blog
    RidingGravel.com

  4. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,265
    My ardents plumped up quite a bit mounted on my Gordos with tubes. They barely fit in the rear stays of my Jones. I get some tire buzz every now and again.
    I am thoroughly addicted to them.

  5. #55
    Expert Crasher
    Reputation: GreenLightGo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    6,355
    Quote Originally Posted by morandi
    My ardents plumped up quite a bit mounted on my Gordos with tubes. They barely fit in the rear stays of my Jones. I get some tire buzz every now and again.
    I am thoroughly addicted to them.
    Yes - quite plump. I get 61mm tread/60.3mm casing on mine at 20 psi mounted on a Gordo, with a tube. Tires been fully stretched (it is 10 months old now, pre-production prototype).

    61 millimeter = 2.4015748031 inches.
    Happiness depends more on the inward disposition of mind than on outward circumstances. Benjamin Franklin

  6. #56
    willtsmith_nwi
    Reputation: willtsmith_nwi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,997
    Quote Originally Posted by Guitar Ted

    I am not going to harp about the Ardent 2.4"er not being 2.4 inches wide. Heck- most tires are not what they say they are for width. But in the case of this Ardent 2.4"er, it is woefully undersized. They would have been better off calling it a 2.3"er, and even then my tubed example was barely that. (I've snce converted it to tubeless as well)
    Yes, but it will make all of us Ardent 2.2" riders happy to have a real 2.2" in the 2.4" ;-)

  7. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    964
    Adding my data points to this (old) thread.

    After 48 hours and 1 ride my 2.4 ardent is still 2+ mm smaller than my 2.35 ikon, which I find a bit disappointing.

    Casing at 30 psi on Enve Am rims:
    Ardent: hair under 59mm
    Ikon: hair over 61mm

    It might keep growing but I'm not holding my breath.

  8. #58
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    4,816
    A 3 page thread devoted to the possible size of one tire..........only on emptybeer! And I actually skimmed through all 3 pages...yikes.
    Plus, I think I have yet another variable to toss into the mix, one mentioned to me by the local LBS owner where I buy all of my Maxxis tires. That is, the EXO casing seems to set up on a rim 'larger', making the whole tire look bigger than a 2.4 Ardent with just the normal casing.

    No measurements were performed to confirm this.....I just thought I'd report it in.

    Carry on.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

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