Results 1 to 11 of 11
  1. #1
    OriginalDonk
    Reputation: OriginalDonk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    286

    Maxxis Crossmark 29" UST?

    Looks like Maxxis has released their Crossmark 29" UST. Anybody running these? Any idea on weight? Most places online and my LBS don't have any in stock. Thoughts?

  2. #2
    Meat Clever
    Reputation: DirtDummy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    673
    Look for BruceBrown posts re: weight and performance
    Quote Originally Posted by VanillaEps View Post
    A little bit of pee just trickled out of my pipi when I saw that.

  3. #3
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,979
    Quote Originally Posted by DirtDummy
    Look for BruceBrown posts re: weight and performance
    Running a Crossmark UST (or LUST as Maxxis calls them) on the rear of my RIP 9 since June of last year. I have two of the Crossmarks and they both weigh around 840g. You can read the thread here.

    Crossmark UST

    Muddy RIP

    I've been running them on Flows with yellow tape and valves only, but that is about to change as the Crossmark is losing air now on the rear of my RIP. Time to add sealant, but I wanted to see how long I could go on them without using sealant. I made it from June to January sealant free, but I must have run over something in the past month - or the cold winter weather is enough to make me lose air every 48 hours.

    Good, solid tough tires.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: simenf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    410
    BB,

    I am running regular Crossmarks with a tubeless setup with sealant today for race and light trail. The side walls are a bit fragile but had no real issues so far. Are the LUSTs worth the extra weight?

  5. #5
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,979
    Quote Originally Posted by simenf
    I am running regular Crossmarks with a tubeless setup with sealant today for race and light trail. The side walls are a bit fragile but had no real issues so far. Are the LUSTs worth the extra weight?
    I've never tried a regular Crossmark, so it is hard for me to compare tire to tire. I'm sure that UST or LUST - using Maxxis terminology - is not for everyone. That being said, I was quite surprised when I received these tires. Yes, the weight put me off when I took them out of the box and weighed them. The super tight bead put me off as I had to use two metal tire irons and a lot of grunt, soap and water to get them on the Flow rims. But I mounted them up and went for a ride where all thoughts of weight were quickly forgotten.

    I do have regular Ardents, so comparing the Ardent UST to the regular Ardent, I can say that one thing that makes the LUST worth it is how much lower I can go with the air pressure. There is a point on the regular Ardent that squirm enters the equation and the tire stops performing well. I really have not found that point on the LUST tires I am running. Maybe because I haven't gone down low enough, but we're talking running pressures in the teens which is pretty low for a big guy like me on the RIP. I think I'm afraid to go lower than 16-18 psi, so I haven't tried. I've had them as high as 25 psi, but love the ride and feel in the 16-21 range. No squirm and amazing grip - especially on rocks, roots, logs, off camber, etc... . So much so, that the 2.25 LUST is giving me every bit as much grip and cushion up front as my Ardent 2.4 "regular" tire run tubeless. That surprised me because I have read so many negative comments about the Ardent 2.25 regular tire (which I've never tried). Again, the low pressures and grip that accompanies it is not a requirement for all riders and the terrain they face, but it is a usual benchmark for UST tires to get that amazing and sturdy grip at low pressures.

    Is it worth it?

    Again, depends on what bike you are riding, what terrain you are tackling, and what you want out of a tire. I have raced on the tires. I've raced them in severe mud (where I got my highest place finish all season). I've taken them out to the Black Hills and mashed every sharp rock I could find with them. The sidewalls haven't even blinked. I've been on every thorn infested trail I could find in my usual stomping grounds. I've had them on pavement to and from the trails. And I'm riding them around on snow and ice now that winter has hit.

    The only negative is (and it's not that big of a negative since punctures happen to UST as well), I have developed a leak in the rear tire in the past few weeks (Crossmark) which I have been running sealant free since June. Either the cold weather is causing this slow leak (I first noticed the slow leak when the temps went sub zero), or I did finally pick up a thorn this fall that has worked its way in deep enough to cause the leak. Or my valve is leaking. I can either try to locate the leak and patch it up from within the tire, or add sealant. I might try to patch it since I am also curious if I can actually get this tire off of the Flow rim considering how difficult it was to mount it up last June.

    Pros....

    •sturdy, durable sidewalls
    •amazing low pressure grip with no loss in sidewall stability
    •ability to run sealant free - at least for a certain length of time (6 months for me on the Crossmark until I figure out what and where the leak is, the Ardent LUST is still fine)
    •super tight bead that is not going to roll off a rim, that's for sure

    Cons....

    •187g (.4 lbs) of extra weight per tire compared to a non LUST version plus sealant (840g for the LUST, 657g for a non LUST Crossmark with 2 ounces of sealant).
    •need a UST ready rim

    BB

  6. #6
    OriginalDonk
    Reputation: OriginalDonk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    286
    I guess I was initially trying to get after the weight of the LUST as it's not listed on the Maxxis website. 187 grams sounds pretty hefty bringing it to 0.8 lbs per pair. I'm no WW but I see other options that are significantly lighter. I've been eyeing Ignitor or Ikon Exo's and converting them to tubeless with Stans. I'm thinkin' the non-UST would be golden for smoother single track (Fort Ord or Boggs out here in the SF Bay Area) and it would be a dice roll on more techy sections. I've found the 29er weight thread but am wondering if people are having plenty of luck with non-LUST Exo's converted to tubeless. I've got a CRSSMAX29 wheelset at the moment running Pythons when it's dry. Thanks for the rundown BB.

  7. #7
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,979
    Quote Originally Posted by BruceBrown
    The only negative is (and it's not that big of a negative since punctures happen to UST as well), I have developed a leak in the rear tire in the past few weeks (Crossmark) which I have been running sealant free since June. Either the cold weather is causing this slow leak (I first noticed the slow leak when the temps went sub zero), or I did finally pick up a thorn this fall that has worked its way in deep enough to cause the leak. Or my valve is leaking. I can either try to locate the leak and patch it up from within the tire, or add sealant. I might try to patch it since I am also curious if I can actually get this tire off of the Flow rim considering how difficult it was to mount it up last June.
    Update: In spite of the winter storm and very cold temperatures, I decided to see what was causing the leak this week in my rear Flow/Crossmark LUST. Turns out, it was the valve after all. Since I have not been using any sealant, it was easy to pop the bead, remove the valve, dip the valve in sealant, reinstall, tighten down the locknut and air up. Leak gone. Tire has held air all week and I've been riding on it every morning in the snow. This was good news to me because I didn't want to have to patch the tire in the middle of winter. So my previous durability assessment of the Maxxis LUST Ardent and Crossmark stands. My leak was the valve's fault.

    So my Maxxis UST tires (or LUST) continue on sealant free (outside of the dipped rear valve) since June of last year.

    I have found out, though, that the I9 Enduro rear hub hates the sub 0 temps as much as my other hubs. I probably need to break down and winterize all my hubs for my morning rides.

  8. #8
    Lets ride!
    Reputation: 1993gsxr907's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    367
    840 grams!!!!
    When can we get a 600-640 gram UST with thorn protection?
    I'm joking
    11 Ellsworth Evolve still in box
    10 Salsa El Mariachi Ti
    96 Kona Hei Hei Ti

  9. #9
    saddlemeat
    Reputation: bsieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    2,568
    On the other hand, deduct 80 gms of sealant, which brings it to same weight as a 760 gm tire with 2 oz of sealant... or a 690 gm tire with a 150 gm tube. Choices.
    Making the smack track baby.

    A Useful Bear
    is a handy thing...

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: StorrsCenterCycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by OriginalDonk
    I guess I was initially trying to get after the weight of the LUST as it's not listed on the Maxxis website. 187 grams sounds pretty hefty bringing it to 0.8 lbs per pair. I'm no WW but I see other options that are significantly lighter. I've been eyeing Ignitor or Ikon Exo's and converting them to tubeless with Stans. I'm thinkin' the non-UST would be golden for smoother single track (Fort Ord or Boggs out here in the SF Bay Area) and it would be a dice roll on more techy sections. I've found the 29er weight thread but am wondering if people are having plenty of luck with non-LUST Exo's converted to tubeless. I've got a CRSSMAX29 wheelset at the moment running Pythons when it's dry. Thanks for the rundown BB.
    I just built up a 29er wheelset with Flows and mounted the Exo Ikon's tubless with yellow tape and sealant. It was a bear to get the bead to seat (I eventually just pulled the valve core and shot it straight with the air gun) because it was pretty loose, but once seated they sealed up really well. Not the widest 2.2 in the world, but the profile looks great...lots of cornering surface.






  11. #11
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,979
    Quote Originally Posted by bsieb
    On the other hand, deduct 80 gms of sealant, which brings it to same weight as a 760 gm tire with 2 oz of sealant... or a 690 gm tire with a 150 gm tube. Choices.
    Right. The sidewall and thorn protection being worth it to date.

    The extra 3-4 watts (or whatever it takes of additional power on climbs) probably isn't going to make or break somebody's overall race or ride effort. I would look closer at the rolling resistance and the Crossmark rolls pretty well...

Posting Permissions

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