Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 26 to 49 of 49
  1. #26
    what a joke
    Reputation: ozlongboarder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,278
    Single crown or dual? ;-)
    blah blah blah

  2. #27
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    6,880
    Quote Originally Posted by OneGearGuy
    ... the difference between bigger rims (700c)/ "smaller" tire (2.3" max right now with the Panaracer) combo with 5" of travel vs. a traditional 26" rim with a 2.5" - 2.7" tire and 6" or more of travel. What is the actual roll out difference between the two "styles?" Wouldn't the wheel's ability to overcome ledges, etc. be more about the overall outer diameter of the tire, since that's where contact is made?
    The biggest difference, right now, is that the 26" FR/DH tires are indestructible. You can go slamming through stuff, at ridiculous speeds, and as long as you can keep the bike upright you'll probably make it through and most likely won't flat. Notice I said, "at ridiculous speeds". When things slow down to granny gear climbing speeds, the benefit of the durable tires is that you can run low pressures and get traction out the wazoo. The downside is that the smaller wheel/tire still gets hooked on ledges and requires an extra burst to get the wheel to roll over it. Doesn't matter how much travel you have, you still have to get the wheel to roll over the ledges or through the holes.

    The flip side is that with current 29" tire technology (including the Rampage's I'm riding) you can't go blasting and slamming through everything, because the tire casings just can't take it. When the trail turns up and the chain drops down to the friendly gears, the bigger wheels/tires just motor up everything. Riding the Behemoth I hardly notice the ledges that bring the pig's smaller wheels/tires to a complete halt.

    MC

  3. #28
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    6,880
    Quote Originally Posted by Rainman
    What rims / hubs do you use with the Rampage tires on your 'Moth?
    ...And, how have the rims / hubs held up to the kind of riding you are doing?
    R.
    I have two wheelsets that I swap out frequently. My 'light/alpine' set is DT 240s hubs (TA front, QR rear) laced to Stans ZTR FR rims. My 'heavy/FR' set is DT 440FR hubs laced to Kris Holm Uni rims. I use 26 x 1.5 tubes most of the time, and lately I've been riding the Rampage's exclusively. The only other tires I'll use on this bike (terrain/conditions dependent) are the Exi's and the Jones XR's. But I've used neither of those since the Rampage's came on the scene.

    As far as how they're holding up, I have no issues to report. The ZTR FR's at 600g, 32mm wide and 32h are super impressive in their durability and resistance to flex. Much of this has to do with the shape of the extrusion, and the rest can be attributed to the thickness of the extrusion. I'm only ~175lbs, but I'd feel confident recommending this rim to riders as heavy as ~250. No dents, dings, or flat spots to date.

    The KH Uni rims at 36h, 38mm wide and 875g are a rare and special beast. I have yet to dent, ding, or flat spot mine, although I've tried pretty hard. I've built several sets of these for riders 360lbs and above, and have yet to hear of any issues.

    I have killed a few rims on the Behemoth, but they were lighter xc-type rims that were not designed for this kind of (ab)use. I was actually happy that those rims failed when they did--it gave me a very good indicator of what they can handle and what they can't, and that allows me to fine tune my wheelbuild recommendations tremendously.

    MC

  4. #29
    AussieLostInNyc
    Reputation: gumby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    650
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee
    .
    Based on the riding I did the past ~7 weeks, I think the 5" travel Behemoth with similar tires and rear shock would eat the pig alive in every trail situation I've come across. I couldn't believe how much work it was to constantly keep the 26" tires from stopping on every ledge along the way.

    MC
    Good read Mike. I have been playing on an Enduro and loved the way it would ride until you slowed down then it was so much harder to get over rocks and other obstacles than my 29er. I thought I needed a 29'er with 6" of travel like the enduro but I have decided that 5" will be plenty with the bigger wheels and its available. It is all about the tires and to a degree stiff forks up front that don't cost the earth then we are in business.
    Can't wait until they hit the market.
    I almost bought one of those pigs as I knew the enduro was weaker. Instead I caved and bought a Giant Glory 8 for FR/DH. I thought it would be a while until the 29er gang supplied me with a bike to do the things I will do on the glory but maybe it's sooner than I thought. Can't wait and keep these great reviews and hints at whats around the corner coming!
    www.nycmtb.com
    .....spreading the love

  5. #30
    Reviewer/Tester
    Reputation: Rainman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    6,205
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee
    I have two wheelsets that I swap out frequently. My 'light/alpine' set is DT 240s hubs (TA front, QR rear) laced to Stans ZTR FR rims. My 'heavy/FR' set is DT 440FR hubs laced to Kris Holm Uni rims. I use 26 x 1.5 tubes most of the time, and lately I've been riding the Rampage's exclusively. The only other tires I'll use on this bike (terrain/conditions dependent) are the Exi's and the Jones XR's. But I've used neither of those since the Rampage's came on the scene.

    As far as how they're holding up, I have no issues to report. The ZTR FR's at 600g, 32mm wide and 32h are super impressive in their durability and resistance to flex. Much of this has to do with the shape of the extrusion, and the rest can be attributed to the thickness of the extrusion. I'm only ~175lbs, but I'd feel confident recommending this rim to riders as heavy as ~250. No dents, dings, or flat spots to date.

    The KH Uni rims at 36h, 38mm wide and 875g are a rare and special beast. I have yet to dent, ding, or flat spot mine, although I've tried pretty hard. I've built several sets of these for riders 360lbs and above, and have yet to hear of any issues.

    I have killed a few rims on the Behemoth, but they were lighter xc-type rims that were not designed for this kind of (ab)use. I was actually happy that those rims failed when they did--it gave me a very good indicator of what they can handle and what they can't, and that allows me to fine tune my wheelbuild recommendations tremendously.

    MC

    Thanks for the info Mike, I appreciate it.


    R.
    It is inevitable ...

  6. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    2,534
    Mike,

    In your initial post you said the following:

    "These guys rip through boulderfields and off ledges like they were on YZX's, and when climbing they've got traction to get up stuff that I don't even know how to attempt. I've done multiple roadtrips to various UT and CO FR stashes (always on my Behemoth) and ridden some of the most mind-bending tech trail around with these guys. And while we're all riding similar moves on otherwise similar bikes, I'm the only one flatting, and I'm usually the only one not cleaning everything:"

    This led me to believe that you thought the 26ers climbed better than the 29ers, but in your latest post it appears you think the 29ers climb better in that they roll over things better. Is it because of low tire pressures which give you more traction for the rear tire??

    I too believe that the 29er tire rolls over stuff better as has been mentioned many times. Of course I have only tried one 2.7 inch tire on the 26er and although it handled great, I just couldn't come to grips with how much it slowed me down.

    I don't think a 2.7 inch tire on a 26er has near the diameter that something like a 2.3 Exi has on a 29er.

    It seems like there is a real tradeoff between fast rolling XC tires and the downhill specific heavy ones that you have been running.

  7. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    576
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee
    The biggest difference, right now, is that the 26" FR/DH tires are indestructible.
    MC
    Mike... as a point of reference can you list some of the 26" tires you're talking about? You give specifics on 29'er tires but the 26'ers you're comparing them to are not as clear. Great info though, thanks!

  8. #33
    Recovering
    Reputation: jbogner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,483
    Seems to me all we really need are 29er DH tubes. The 400g+ DH tubes in my freeride 26er never flat, whether I'm riding with 2.5 Timberwolf folding bead single ply tires (claimed weight 864g) or 2.5 Nevegals with wire beads and dual ply DH casing (1350g). I've flatted regular tubes in the Timberwolves (rear tire in two days of real DH, after which it was replaced by a DH tube and hasn't flatted in over a year, front tire with regular tube just flatted a couple months ago, after almost a year of riding it, and has been replaced with DH tube). That's two flats on that bike in over a year of serious freeride and DH (as well as trailriding) and only when running regular tubes. No flats at all with DH tubes. By comparison, I've gotten multiple flats in a single ride on my 29er more than once- even on the supposedly heavy-casing Exis.

    I'd gladly trade a little weight for the extra peace of mind. Can't wait to see what's coming down the pike.

    My 29er wheels with 2.1 Ignitors are several inches wider in diameter than my 26's with 2.5s. And while the 2.5s do provide wicked traction, a beefy 29er tire would put them to shame...
    Former New Yorker, now in Fort Collins
    http://www.nycmtb.com

  9. #34
    jl
    jl is offline
    climb
    Reputation: jl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,221
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee

    And they have a durable casing (relative to their ~800g weight) that hasn't died in over a month of trying to kill it. In short, they've allowed me to see the real potential of the Behemoth.


    Using the 4 different forks on two different bikes has allowed me to experiment with HTA (and by extension, trail) on both bikes. Having both bikes has taught me a lot more about the relationships between STA and CS length, as well as BB height/drop, and wheelbase. Aside from the geeky geo stuff, I've had my own eyes opened on what a good AM/FR tire should and should not do, as well as what I can do on a good tire. It's been a great summer.
    Mike,

    You've spent some time talking about tires and shocks. How about addressing some insights on the two most debatable topics on the 29er board. HTA and CS length.

    Some 29"ers think you need a steeper HTA compared to a 26"er, and some 26"ers think the CS length is too long on a 29"er. Since you've choppered out the Behemoth, and ridden the pig...

    Any insights on those topics?
    Last edited by jl; 08-30-2006 at 12:40 PM.
    Ride On!

  10. #35
    highly visible
    Reputation: GlowBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,177
    Quote Originally Posted by OneGearGuy
    Wouldn't the wheel's ability to overcome ledges, etc. be more about the overall outer diameter of the tire, since that's where contact is made?
    Not in my experience. What initially sold me on 29"ers was a technical ride on my cyclocross bike. Even though the overall diameter of 27.3" on that bike was only marginally bigger than the 26.5" on my fat-tired small-wheeled mountain bike, the way it rolled over stuff was amazing. This has led me to believe that since tires compress, the actual diameter of the rim makes at least as much of a difference as overall diameter.
    "People like GloyBoy are deaf. They are partisan, intellectually lazy & usually very angry." -Jaybo

  11. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: miles e's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,823
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee
    The biggest differences were from the unflattable 26" tires, and the coil rear shock. Amount of travel meant little, in either direction.
    Thanks for elaborating Mike. My riding style definitely doesn't call for 1300 gram DH tires, so it sounds like there is very little reason for me to keep a 26" FS bike around.
    A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.

  12. #37
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    6,880
    Quote Originally Posted by dumbaSS
    Mike... as a point of reference can you list some of the 26" tires you're talking about? You give specifics on 29'er tires but the 26'ers you're comparing them to are not as clear. Great info though, thanks!
    These are the 26" tires I tested:
    WTB WeirWolf 2.5
    WTB WeirWolf 2.55 LT
    WTB TimberWolf 2.5
    WTB TimberWolf 2.7
    Kenda Nevegal 2.5
    Kenda Nevegal 2.7
    Specialized Chunder 2.5
    Specialized Pin It 2.5
    Maxxis Minion 2.6
    Maxxis Advantage 2.5
    Maxxis High Roller 2.5

    MC

  13. #38
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    6,880
    Quote Originally Posted by richwolf
    ...This led me to believe that you thought the 26ers climbed better than the 29ers, but in your latest post it appears you think the 29ers climb better in that they roll over things better. Is it because of low tire pressures which give you more traction for the rear tire??
    Sorry about the confusion. The 26" tires shone in that the low pressures allowed wicked traction. The low pressures were only possible because of the durable casings (read: 1400g tires) keeping me from pinch flatting.


    Quote Originally Posted by richwolf
    It seems like there is a real tradeoff between fast rolling XC tires and the downhill specific heavy ones that you have been running.
    I think it doesn't have to be so black/white. I think a properly designed tire can be semi-fast rolling and still durable enough to take a hit and keep going.

    MC

  14. #39
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    6,880
    Quote Originally Posted by jl
    Mike,

    You've spent some time talking about tires and shocks. How about addressing some insights on the two most debatable topics on the 29er board. HTA and CS length.

    Some 29"ers think you need a steeper HTA compared to a 26"er, and some 26"ers think the CS length is too long on a 29"er. Since you've choppered out the Behemoth, and ridden the pig...

    Any insights on those topics?
    Jeff-

    I don't wanna open that can o' worms here. Nothing good can come from it. Open a new thread with the same question and I'll be happy to chime in once or twice.

    Cheers,

    MC

  15. #40
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    6,880
    Quote Originally Posted by jbogner
    Seems to me all we really need are 29er DH tubes. The 400g+ DH tubes in my freeride 26er never flat
    There's a lot more than just flat protection at work here. I could make my current tires flat proof with a little work, but that would do nothing to increase their air volume or their width or tread configuration. It's the whole package that matters.

    MC

  16. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Thylacine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,224
    Sounds like you need a 2.5 dual ply semi-knob. Guess the issue is, with the thicker sidewalls to prevent pinchflats, you loose the suppleness at low pressures to give you good traction feedback at slow speeds.

    Have you tried the Tioga Yellow Kirin 2.3 with Apex casing? Not available in 29er but might be worth a try just for fun on your 26ers.

    I think the future of 'all mountain' tires is big casings, small knobs. The YK is like that, as is the new Kenda whateveritscalled.
    No longer member of the bike industry nor society, so don't hassle me.

  17. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    362
    From that bunch, which would you most like to see produced in a 29'er version?

    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee
    These are the 26" tires I tested:
    WTB WeirWolf 2.5
    WTB WeirWolf 2.55 LT
    WTB TimberWolf 2.5
    WTB TimberWolf 2.7
    Kenda Nevegal 2.5
    Kenda Nevegal 2.7
    Specialized Chunder 2.5
    Specialized Pin It 2.5
    Maxxis Minion 2.6
    Maxxis Advantage 2.5
    Maxxis High Roller 2.5

    MC

  18. #43
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    6,880
    Quote Originally Posted by Daner
    From that bunch, which would you most like to see produced in a 29'er version?
    I could tell ya all about it, but then I'd have to kill ya...

    MC

  19. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: PuddleDuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    934
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee

    Using the 4 different forks on two different bikes has allowed me to experiment with HTA (and by extension, trail) on both bikes. Having both bikes has taught me a lot more about the relationships between STA and CS length, as well as BB height/drop, and wheelbase. Aside from the geeky geo stuff, I've had my own eyes opened on what a good AM/FR tire should and should not do, as well as what I can do on a good tire. It's been a great summer.

    Hi Mike,
    Did anyone ever ask about the differences btwn STA / CS / BB and WB??

    Cheers

  20. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davidcopperfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,709
    Mc we need more such comparisons more DH oriented

  21. #46
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,840
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee
    The biggest differences were from the unflattable 26" tires, and the coil rear shock. Amount of travel meant little, in either direction.
    Will similarly unflattable 29" tires weigh around 1600 grams (3.53 pounds) each?

  22. #47
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    6,880
    Quote Originally Posted by tl1
    Will similarly unflattable 29" tires weigh around 1600 grams (3.53 pounds) each?
    Depends on lots of things. I've been testing several protos over the last ~year, with some versions weighing in at ~1100g and others as high as ~1900g. Favorites so far are about ~1370g/tire, and still virtually unflattable even as low as 6psi.

    MC

  23. #48
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,840

    I love my 26 inch fatties

    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee
    Depends on lots of things. I've been testing several protos over the last ~year, with some versions weighing in at ~1100g and others as high as ~1900g. Favorites so far are about ~1370g/tire, and still virtually unflattable even as low as 6psi.

    MC
    Conti Diesel ProTection 2.5, Schwalbe Big Betty 2.4, and my ancient Hutchinson Coyote 2.3s (Wire beads 950+ grams, folding bead soft rubber ones = 1250 + grams) I don't really need them when riding your old cross country haunts in Michigan like the folks out West on super rocky trails need them but they're just so much fun with all that traction and the comfortable ride at a low psi setting.

  24. #49
    Powered by ice cream.
    Reputation: Enel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,263
    I can't believe how much has changed in the two years since this post. It does not seem that long ago, and the world is definitely a different place for 29" wheels.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Posting Permissions

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