Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 201 to 300 of 463
  1. #201
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    797
    Quote Originally Posted by Sf100al View Post
    I am using the 2.35 Ikon front and back on loose, dry conditions(san diego). These tires are a great deal better than the stock tires on my bike (2013 trek superbly al 100 elite). These tires, for me, are perfect for my conditions. I would highly recommend these tire. Also, I found them cheap on amazon(if price matters).
    I ride in the LA area, so probably similar conditions. These tires sound great. I looked at Amazon, but don't know what is the best option. eXc? EXO? 3C? All of the above? (Why do tire manufacturers have to use all those acronyms???)

  2. #202
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,853
    Plenty of options to choose from, beyond tread pattern and size:

    Casing: standard, eXC, TR, LUST/UST, 2-ply DH specific
    Compound: single compound, dual compound, 3c (triple compound), super tacky
    Bead: wire, folding
    Additional feature: EXO (sidewall protection), Silkworm (puncture protection)

    Head explode yet? This is just a portion of the options that you'd see just shopping mtn bike tires.

    I ride many different parts of SoCal and I'd spring for the 3c/EXO/TR version, for more reliable tubeless and lower risk of sidewall cuts.

  3. #203
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 8iking VIIking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,252

    Re: Maxxis Ikon 2.35

    Quote Originally Posted by agoura_biker View Post
    I ride in the LA area, so probably similar conditions. These tires sound great. I looked at Amazon, but don't know what is the best option. eXc? EXO? 3C? All of the above? (Why do tire manufacturers have to use all those acronyms???)
    It all depends on your trails and if you intend to set the tire up tubeless. 3C and exc from Maxxis are the same thing I believe. If you aren't prone to sidewall cuts, I would go EXO rear and non EXO front. If you are, EXO both. Use TR if you plan on running tubeless.

  4. #204
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    797
    Quote Originally Posted by 8iking VIIking View Post
    It all depends on your trails and if you intend to set the tire up tubeless. 3C and exc from Maxxis are the same thing I believe. If you aren't prone to sidewall cuts, I would go EXO rear and non EXO front. If you are, EXO both. Use TR if you plan on running tubeless.
    Great advice, thanks! I will go tubeless (using UST rims). I've been riding tires with pretty sidewalls with no problems (I probably just jinxed myself there), so maybe try the non-EXO.

  5. #205
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    797
    Quote Originally Posted by Varaxis View Post
    Plenty of options to choose from, beyond tread pattern and size:

    Casing: standard, eXC, TR, LUST/UST, 2-ply DH specific
    Compound: single compound, dual compound, 3c (triple compound), super tacky
    Bead: wire, folding
    Additional feature: EXO (sidewall protection), Silkworm (puncture protection)

    Head explode yet? This is just a portion of the options that you'd see just shopping mtn bike tires.

    I ride many different parts of SoCal and I'd spring for the 3c/EXO/TR version, for more reliable tubeless and lower risk of sidewall cuts.
    This is great, thanks! I've just sorted out Schwalbe's codes, so this really helps for the Ikon!

  6. #206
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 8iking VIIking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,252

    Re: Maxxis Ikon 2.35

    Quote Originally Posted by agoura_biker View Post
    Great advice, thanks! I will go tubeless (using UST rims). I've been riding tires with pretty sidewalls with no problems (I probably just jinxed myself there), so maybe try the non-EXO.
    You might still wanna go with an exo rear. The ikons are xc race tires, so personally I wouldn't run a non exo rear unless on race day or maybe if you ride some really benign trails. It adds a little weight but the headache saved from sidewall tears is well worth it IMO

  7. #207
    May contain nuts
    Reputation: Haggis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,126
    Quote Originally Posted by 8iking VIIking View Post
    You might still wanna go with an exo rear. The ikons are xc race tires, so personally I wouldn't run a non exo rear unless on race day or maybe if you ride some really benign trails. It adds a little weight but the headache saved from sidewall tears is well worth it IMO
    +1 - and less squirm at normal pressures. Annoying having to raise pressure because sidewalls are flimsy...

  8. #208
    mtbr member
    Reputation: thecanoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,234

    Maxxis Ikon 2.35

    I'll be picking up my Tallboy tomorrow with some band new Ibis 941 rims and Ikon 2.35 front and rear. My previous rims were Stan's Crests with Maxxis Ignitor 2.1 tires. I was running low 20's for pressure. At 165lbs, what would be a good starting pressure since I now have wider rims?


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Santa Cruz Tallboy
    Moonlander

  9. #209
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    164
    On my Enve AMs I run around 21psi and am 172lb without gear.

    Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

  10. #210
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    11,280
    Quote Originally Posted by thecanoe View Post
    I'll be picking up my Tallboy tomorrow with some band new Ibis 941 rims and Ikon 2.35 front and rear. My previous rims were Stan's Crests with Maxxis Ignitor 2.1 tires. I was running low 20's for pressure. At 165lbs, what would be a good starting pressure since I now have wider rims?
    You can start at 4-5 less than your previous with a given tire. Check for rim hits and adjust.
    15/19 could work.

  11. #211
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    797
    Quote Originally Posted by Haggis View Post
    +1 - and less squirm at normal pressures. Annoying having to raise pressure because sidewalls are flimsy...
    You and 8iking Viking make compelling arguments for the EXO! Thanks for the suggestions.

  12. #212
    mtbr member
    Reputation: thecanoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,234

    Maxxis Ikon 2.35



    Just put the EXO on some new Ibis 941 carbon rims. But it's raining out. So not trail test today.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Santa Cruz Tallboy
    Moonlander

  13. #213
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,853
    That slime for tubes in your pic is for putting into tubes for your alternate/secondary bike(s), right?

  14. #214
    Crash Dummy In Training
    Reputation: PauLCa916's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    1,432
    Quote Originally Posted by Varaxis View Post
    That slime for tubes in your pic is for putting into tubes for your alternate/secondary bike(s), right?
    I was wondering the same thing earlier.
    Then I thought it looks like a LBS shelf or he is stocked up on slime.
    ​​
    2015 Flyxii / ENVE /Chris King Carbon 29'er H.T.
    SRAM XX1
    2012 Stump Jumper Comp 29'er H.T. SRAM XX1
    1997 Rock Hopper / Rock Shox Recon Silver / 1 x 10 SRAM X9 XO Mix XT V Brake system

  15. #215
    mtbr member
    Reputation: thecanoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,234

    Maxxis Ikon 2.35

    LBS shelf. Mine is set up with Stan's.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Santa Cruz Tallboy
    Moonlander

  16. #216
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    139
    Quote Originally Posted by thecanoe View Post


    Just put the EXO on some new Ibis 941 carbon rims. But it's raining out. So not trail test today.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    thecanoe - what are your riding impressions of your new rims and tires?

  17. #217
    mtbr member
    Reputation: thecanoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,234

    Maxxis Ikon 2.35

    I have 4 rides now on New England trails. I am totally impressed. Best upgrade and money that I've spent in recent years. I'm so impressed that I haven't ridden my fat bike since getting these. It's almost like a 29+. I've settle on 15psi and traction is unreal.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Santa Cruz Tallboy
    Moonlander

  18. #218
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    Do you have a caliper to measure the tire width? Curious to what size the already massive Ikon 2.35 grows to on the 941.

    Thanks!

  19. #219
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    139
    Quote Originally Posted by thecanoe View Post
    I have 4 rides now on New England trails. I am totally impressed. Best upgrade and money that I've spent in recent years. I'm so impressed that I haven't ridden my fat bike since getting these. It's almost like a 29+. I've settle on 15psi and traction is unreal.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Thanks. Can you compare acceleration to your old set up? And are you using 15psi in the rear too?

  20. #220
    mtbr member
    Reputation: thecanoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,234

    Maxxis Ikon 2.35

    Quote Originally Posted by Colin+M View Post
    Do you have a caliper to measure the tire width? Curious to what size the already massive Ikon 2.35 grows to on the 941.

    Thanks!
    At the widest point the tire is 60mm's.

    And yes, I'm running 15lbs front and rear.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Santa Cruz Tallboy
    Moonlander

  21. #221
    mtbr member
    Reputation: thecanoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,234

    Maxxis Ikon 2.35

    Quote Originally Posted by mike_mtn View Post
    Thanks. Can you compare acceleration to your old set up? And are you using 15psi in the rear too?
    At 66 y/o, I don't worry about acceleration too much. What I do notice is
    1) a much smoother ride
    2) slow speed stability is close to that of my fat bike.
    3) everyone says " your tires are massive"




    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Santa Cruz Tallboy
    Moonlander

  22. #222
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 8iking VIIking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,252

    Re: Maxxis Ikon 2.35

    Quote Originally Posted by thecanoe View Post
    At 66 y/o, I don't worry about acceleration too much. What I do notice is
    1) a much smoother ride
    2) slow speed stability is close to that of my fat bike.
    3) everyone says " your tires are massive"




    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Props to you for riding at 66! I hope I'm able to ride at that age. And thanks for the feedback

  23. #223
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,509
    Quote Originally Posted by thecanoe View Post
    3) everyone says " your tires are massive"
    Ha, you get used to em. These seemed pretty big to me for a bit, and I was coming off of 2.3 Renegades. Now they just seem normal. I'm running the non exo's on my Stumpjumper HT at around 17 per tire and they are perfect. I ride in rocky areas too, but they do fine as long as I take lines that go 'over' rather than 'around'. You don't schralp up the back tire so much that way.

  24. #224
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    681
    Quote Originally Posted by rusty904 View Post
    I use one on the back of my Process 111. It's not a long travel bike but I definitely ride it like one. Lift access on Beech MTN, Pisgah downhills, etc. I'd say the Ikon will give you plenty of grip in dry conditions. You loose out some in braking grip mostly. Any you have to be ready to slide around a bit. I personally love it paired up with a grippy front tire. Like I said in an earlier post, I think the massive volume makes the sliding very predictable.
    Hey rusty904, so how was clearance on the back of your Kona with the 2.35? I am thinking about getting a set of 2.35s for my weekly XC race, I have Trail Kings 2.2s now which are great but a bit too much for that. They are 57.2 mm casing compared to 58-59 on the Ikons but I am wondering if they are taller than the TKs. That would be a problem. Thx
    2016 Transition Smuggler
    2016 TREK Fuel EX 9

  25. #225
    mtbr member
    Reputation: thecanoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,234

    Maxxis Ikon 2.35

    Quote Originally Posted by 8iking VIIking View Post
    Props to you for riding at 66! I hope I'm able to ride at that age. And thanks for the feedback
    Thanks,
    I just past 2000 miles for the year.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Santa Cruz Tallboy
    Moonlander

  26. #226
    change is good
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    2,605

    Maxxis Ikon 2.35

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  27. #227
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    95
    Any one know if this tire will fit on the rear of a 2012 Santa Cruz Highball? I'm running Maxis Aspens 2.1 now and I think the added width will be ok, just wondering about the height clearance. Its time for some tires and these sound like a great way to add a bit of squish to this hardtail.

  28. #228
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,320
    The Ikon 29 x 2.35 is a big volume tire every bit as big as an Ardent 2.4.
    Maxxis Ikon 2.35-uploadfromtaptalk1426438794265.jpg

    ...sent by dixie cup/string

  29. #229
    mtbr member
    Reputation: B888S's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    142
    I just put one of these on the rear of my Stumpjumper FSR and paired it with an Ardent 2.4 on the front. I am running it tubeless, have about 60 miles on it, and am very happy with its performance so far. It rolls relatively well, has good traction, and lots of volume. Just need to see how long it lasts.
    '14 Demo 8 II
    '13 Stumpjumper FSR Elite
    '13 Stumpjumper HT Comp
    '13 Roubaix Elite Apex

  30. #230
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    2,451
    Quote Originally Posted by Flyin_W View Post
    The Ikon 29 x 2.35 is a big volume tire every bit as big as an Ardent 2.4.
    Just measured an Ikon 2.3 and Ardent 2.4 on 23mm rims and the Ikon is fractionally wider in the tread and carcass.

  31. #231
    mtbr member
    Reputation: seat_boy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    2,373
    That's surprising, since I measured my Ikon 2.35 closer to a 2.25, and that on a Blunt 35 rim. I was pretty disappointed it was so small... my Vee Mission 2.4 is noticeably fatter.

    Quote Originally Posted by NordieBoy View Post
    Just measured an Ikon 2.3 and Ardent 2.4 on 23mm rims and the Ikon is fractionally wider in the tread and carcass.

  32. #232
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    293
    how does it compares to the specialized fast trak? i think is one of the best 29er tire for the rear, light, fast, and very gripy for such small knobs even in wet conditions. does the ikon match that kind of performance?

  33. #233
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smithcreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    537
    Quote Originally Posted by seat_boy View Post
    That's surprising, since I measured my Ikon 2.35 closer to a 2.25, and that on a Blunt 35 rim. I was pretty disappointed it was so small... my Vee Mission 2.4 is noticeably fatter.
    That's surprising, since I measured my Ikon at 2.30" on a Haven 21mm (internal) rim. I was impressed it was almost what it claimed to be on the casing.

  34. #234
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,019
    Quote Originally Posted by checocc View Post
    how does it compares to the specialized fast trak? i think is one of the best 29er tire for the rear, light, fast, and very gripy for such small knobs even in wet conditions. does the ikon match that kind of performance?
    Funny I just replaced the Ikon 29x2.35 rear with a FastTrak 2.3 specifically to do any XC race. I did one other ride on a trail you might call a "fast track" and pulled it back off.

    The FastTrak doesn't have the volume of the IKon. The XC race was on some reasonable technical trails and I had no issues at 22psi on 35mm OD LB rims. Not really super loose corners though. I was pretty happy with them being light tires.
    Next ride was an hour each way to the trial for a 45 minute offroad ride so I kept the pressure at 35. They sucked at this PSI. Sliding all over the place but I know that trail well so just went with it.
    The Fastrak compares more to the Ikin 2.2 IMHO

  35. #235
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    Quote Originally Posted by seat_boy View Post
    That's surprising, since I measured my Ikon 2.35 closer to a 2.25, and that on a Blunt 35 rim. I was pretty disappointed it was so small... my Vee Mission 2.4 is noticeably fatter.
    You must have gotten a dud. My 2.35's are huge.

  36. #236
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    5,583
    No doubt. The 2.35 Ikon TR Exo is a huge tire. I like it, say, on a single speed as it spins up nicely and isn't too heavy. Wouldn't run it on a suspension or bigger travel bike personally.

  37. #237
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    20
    I've been running one on the back of my Stumpy Evo 29 for 2 months and I love it! The volume is great and and it has a nice, predictable break in corners (at least IMO). I have it paired with a 2.5" DHF right now. I was pleasantly suprised to see that it isn't completely "dwarfed" in size by the DHF. I may switch to a lighter front tire for the summer trails but I'll be keeping the ikon out back.

  38. #238
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bikeboardorblade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    353
    I'm looking at getting either the Ikon 2.35 or Ardent Race 2.2, both Exo, as a back tire for my SB66, paired with a Minion DHF up front. I ride all over Utah, what do you guys think?

  39. #239
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    4,595
    Quote Originally Posted by bikeboardorblade View Post
    I'm looking at getting either the Ikon 2.35 or Ardent Race 2.2, both Exo, as a back tire for my SB66, paired with a Minion DHF up front. I ride all over Utah, what do you guys think?
    I've done dhf/ardent before. Not an ardent race or an ikon though. Planning on using dhf/ardent again this summer

  40. #240
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    164
    I decided to start on the season here in Ohio with the 2.35 Ikons front and rear on my Rip 9 RDO. I got a 25 mile ride in last weekend on cool, occasionally damp conditions. The trail (Mohican) has a lot of roots and some rocks. Big Ikons provided ample traction and the large size was certainly confidence inspiring. There were a couple muddy spots on the trail and these don't shed mud that well, so would not be the best in areas where there is a lot of mud.

    I've run a few different tire combo's on the bike including 2.35 Nobby Nics F/R and Minnions F/R. For now I'm going to stick with the 2.35 Ikons on this bike and see how it goes.

  41. #241
    Cactus Cuddler
    Reputation: tehllama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    1,765
    Quote Originally Posted by Blatant View Post
    No doubt. The 2.35 Ikon TR Exo is a huge tire. I like it, say, on a single speed as it spins up nicely and isn't too heavy. Wouldn't run it on a suspension or bigger travel bike personally.
    I'm running the 2.35 Ikon TR/Exo/3C on the rear at 130mm suspension travel, and for the mixture of hardpack, loose-over-hard, light clay-laden mud, and pavement I run it on that tire has been phenomenal. I have installed a sharp rock right through the treaded section of the casing (taking my 235lb self, 30lb bike, 10lb of gear) trying to monster truck wheelie through jagged rock gardens at 30mph, but once Stan's did it's thing that tire has been peerless.

    On my 20.3mm internal width Inferno25's, , the 2.35 Ikon is about 2mm narrower than my 2.4 Ardents up front. All told, the combined low rolling resistance, reasonable weight (considering what I'm asking of them), and solid straight line traction with predictable breakaway is just amazing.

  42. #242
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    5,583
    Cool. I'm running it on the rear on my SS and it's pretty good overall in that application for trails here in Phoenix. I have run it on a bigger-travel bike and didn't really like it as much, particularly for steeper climbs and hard turning. I found, on the FS bike, it broke traction before I was expecting, but that's just my experience.

    I'm currently running a Slaughter Grid rear on my FS bike. Similar concept, but huge cornering knobs that dig in when leaned over. Nowhere near the volume of the Ikon, though, which is why I like it on the SS.

  43. #243
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    2,451
    Been using the Ikon 2.35 on the rear and Ardent 2.25 on the front of my Kona Unit hard tail SS.

    Breaking loose in the rear a little earlier than I'd like when climbing.
    Moved the Ikon 2.35 to the front and put an Ikon 2.2 on the rear.

    More cush and less deflection with the wider front and seemed to be a little more traction from the narrower rear.

    Next to try, is an Ardent Race on the back.

  44. #244
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 8iking VIIking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,252
    To me this tire really is the perfect front tire for an xc bike. I've used it in both desert (utah) and forest (minnesota) conditions and its been awesome. Great traction and volume in a reasonably light package. I'd imagine itd be a good back tire on a more downhill oriented bike, but up front you'd probably want something beefier

  45. #245
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    4,595
    Quote Originally Posted by 8iking VIIking View Post
    To me this tire really is the perfect front tire for an xc bike. I've used it in both desert (utah) and forest (minnesota) conditions and its been awesome. Great traction and volume in a reasonably light package. I'd imagine itd be a good back tire on a more downhill oriented bike, but up front you'd probably want something beefier
    I usually use a DHF up front and DHR2 rear during fall/winter and Ardent rear during sprint/summer. Debating whether or not I should give the Ikon a try instead of the Ardent.

  46. #246
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pac8541's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    107
    Is there an ideal internal rim width, or a "best range", for the Ikon 2.35?

  47. #247
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    22,556
    You dude, got a dud, my 2.35 Ikon casing is about the same size as the 2.4" Ardent I have, was very surprised when I got it and mounted it up, couldn't believe how big it was.
    Quote Originally Posted by seat_boy View Post
    That's surprising, since I measured my Ikon 2.35 closer to a 2.25, and that on a Blunt 35 rim. I was pretty disappointed it was so small... my Vee Mission 2.4 is noticeably fatter.
    Not sure, but I've run it on an old Flow, WTB i25 and now Velocity Dually45 and it's worked well on all, but honestly love it on the Dually, it's massive to say the least and notice much better climbing and braking traction on the Dually compared to the i25, this is on a rigid KM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Pac8541 View Post
    Is there an ideal internal rim width, or a "best range", for the Ikon 2.35?
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??

  48. #248
    connisseur
    Reputation: Tickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    536
    I run this tire on the rear of my hardtail and it's nice, not enough knobbage for front use at least around here. I bought 2 of these tires last year and installed the second one recently and it was at least 100g heavier than the first.

  49. #249
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pac8541's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    107
    Thanks LyNx, I'm considering these on either a Sun Ringle Black Flag or Charger and there's just over 3mm's (I think) difference between the 2 internally. They're going on a SIR 9.

  50. #250
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    2,451
    They run well on WTB i23's, so anything wider would be even moar betterer.

  51. #251
    beater
    Reputation: evasive's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,154
    My LBS has one coming for me, which I'll mount on Stan's FR rims. This should be a good fast-rolling tire to help with the early season fitness miles I'm logging. The Michelin Wild Grip'R is killing me.

  52. #252
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pac8541's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    107
    Is 19mm too narrow to maximize the benefits of this tire?

  53. #253
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 8iking VIIking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,252
    Quote Originally Posted by Pac8541 View Post
    Is 19mm too narrow to maximize the benefits of this tire?
    To "maximize" the benefits, I would say that no, 19mm is not ideal. However I believe it'll work just fine. I've run mine on 21mm ID rims and they've worked well, just not quite as well as with larger rims

  54. #254
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pac8541's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    107
    Cool, good info, thank you. . Looking at the Sun Ringle wheelsets, Black Flag and Charger. While I like the lower profile of the BF's the Chargers are a significantly wider wheel. Think I'll go with those.

  55. #255
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    53
    used them on wtb i19 was ok
    now on american classic wide lightning and they looks like fat bike now

  56. #256
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pac8541's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    107
    Anybody run the 2.35 on the rear of a SIR9? Wondering about fit, tire rub/frame flex, etc.

  57. #257
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by Ohiorick View Post
    Any one know if this tire will fit on the rear of a 2012 Santa Cruz Highball? I'm running Maxis Aspens 2.1 now and I think the added width will be ok, just wondering about the height clearance. Its time for some tires and these sound like a great way to add a bit of squish to this hardtail.
    Just installed these on my Highball,front and rear. They fit fine, with plenty of room. These mounted and aired up easier than any tire I have had on this bike. I am very impressed.

  58. #258
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    8,489
    How does the Ikon compare to the Racing Ralph 2.35 SS? The 2015 model.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Death from Below.

  59. #259
    beater
    Reputation: evasive's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,154
    I've been out for a handful of rides with my new tires: High Roller 2 in front and an Ikon 2.35 in back. Both tires are 29", TR, Exo, 3C. Different 3C for each, obviously. MaxTerra in front, MaxSpeed in back.

    I am a big fan of this combination and am really impressed by the Ikon.

    I had been thinking about this combination last year, and was chuffed when bhowell commented that he uses it on his Prime. I've been using big tires for years: DHF/DHR2, DHF/DHF, and then last year I tried out the new Michelin offerings: Wild Rock'R 2 in front and Wild Grip'R in back. I noticed a loss of climbing traction in that case, but wasn't surprised considering the difference in rear tread.

    What surprises me now is that I haven't lost anything with the Ikon- it climbs (and corners!) as well as the knobbier Wild Grip'R, and the change in rolling resistance is insane.

    There are a lot of guys I ride with who have Ardents in back. Two of us just made the switch to the Ikon, and I think that'll catch on. I still want to try the Minion SS and the Hurricane when they're available, but for now I'm really happy with my tires. I feel like I'm getting away with something having this kind of performance in a fast-rolling tire. That said, I don't want to take them to ride in desert chunk. I'll mount DHF/DHR2 for an upcoming trip.

  60. #260
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TheOrca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    191
    Quote Originally Posted by evasive View Post
    I've been out for a handful of rides with my new tires: High Roller 2 in front and an Ikon 2.35 in back. Both tires are 29", TR, Exo, 3C.
    I ride this combo too sometimes. I just wish Maxxis would make a larger volume HR2 for the 29er...the casing volume of the Ardent 2.4 and the Ikon 2.35 are larger than the 2.3 HR2. I eventually swapped to 2.35 HD front / 2.35 Ikon rear...really like this too.

  61. #261
    beater
    Reputation: evasive's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,154
    Yeah, it would be nice if it were about the size of the DHR2. I had a summer fling with Hans Dampfs in 2012. I don't see myself going back.

  62. #262
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    5,583
    I'm in desert chunk and do ride the Ikon 2.35 on my single speed. Know what I'm running on the rear of my Phantom? A Specialized Slaughter Grid. Awesome tire in our conditions, just not enough volume for a hardtail IMO.

  63. #263
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,613
    I'm thinking about a Bontrager 2.3 XR3 or a Spec Ground control 2.3. Give up a little width for a little more knobbiness, at similar weight.

    I like the Ardent Race also, but 29x2.2 is the widest.

  64. #264
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    971
    I run a Specialized Ground Control 2.3 in back and a Butcher/ HR-2 front. Works very well IMO.

  65. #265
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TheOrca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    191
    Quote Originally Posted by evasive View Post
    Yeah, it would be nice if it were about the size of the DHR2. I had a summer fling with Hans Dampfs in 2012. I don't see myself going back.
    I went down the same road a couple years ago. First time I had a HD was in 2011. It didn't last long at all and I swore to never return do to longevity. But, I think the new ones have different rubber...this one seems to be holding up a LOT better!

  66. #266
    connisseur
    Reputation: Tickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    536
    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    I'm thinking about a Bontrager 2.3 XR3 or a Spec Ground control 2.3. Give up a little width for a little more knobbiness, at similar weight.

    I like the Ardent Race also, but 29x2.2 is the widest.
    The Bontrager tires are nice, I have an older 29-4 I traded for on the front of my hardtail(Ikon 2.35 in the back) and it's been a great front tire. I like it better than the Ardent 2.4, more predictable in the loose than the Ardent was especially after a little wear. About time to replace it and I will def try another if they have something equivalent.

  67. #267
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    How does the Ikon compare to the Racing Ralph 2.35 SS? The 2015 model.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I have RaRa rear pacestar compound and it has significant wear after pretty short use.

  68. #268
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    22,556
    Well Steve, I would say that's a good move, the XR3 is like a beefed up Ikon, as in very similar knobs, just bigger and better grip more so when going down under braking and still roll really fast. Running one now on the rear of my Phantom after having run the 2.35" Ikon for a bit, really liking it.

    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    I'm thinking about a Bontrager 2.3 XR3 or a Spec Ground control 2.3. Give up a little width for a little more knobbiness, at similar weight.

    I like the Ardent Race also, but 29x2.2 is the widest.
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??

  69. #269
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    8,489
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    How does the Ikon compare to the Racing Ralph 2.35 SS? The 2015 model.
    Meant to ask: How does it compare on the FRONT?
    Death from Below.

  70. #270
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    53
    after few more rids with the new wheels american classic wide lightning (the old set is wtb i19) the tire are ikon 2.2 rear (to tight for the 2.35 ) and ikon 2.35 front
    tr and exo
    today i try them in more technical single-track alot of rock climbing up and down
    and i mast say the combo of wide rim and the ikon is amazing so stable and magnificent grip the bike just climb anything now

  71. #271
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    10

    Whiskey 50 on IKON's. 2.35 front, 2.2 back

    I switched to IKON's for the Whiskey 50 in Prescott AZ this past weekend. We had stream crossings, technical sections, 7,000 feet of climbing/descending and the IKON's did great. Traction on steep, loose, rocky climbs were no problem. Like them so much that I plan to leave them on and use them for all of my riding here in Phoenix.

    I have them mounted on Roval Traverse SL Fatties (30mm inner width) does ad extra volume/low pressure and great in corners!

    Maxxis Ikon 2.35-2-2.2vs2.35-ikon.jpg
    2.35 IKON on Right, 2.20 IKON on left

    Maxxis Ikon 2.35-3-2.2vs2.35-ikon.jpg
    I didn't get scientific, but the knobs do look a bit deeper, more aggressive on the 2.35 vs 2.2

    Maxxis Ikon 2.35-5-2.35-ikon-fattie.jpg
    2.35 mounted up

    Maxxis Ikon 2.35-9-2.35-ikon-enve-mtn.jpg
    2.35 on the Enve Mtn Fork

  72. #272
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    111
    Breaking loose in the rear a little earlier than I'd like when climbing.
    Moved the Ikon 2.35 to the front and put an Ikon 2.2 on the rear.

    More cush and less deflection with the wider front and seemed to be a little more traction from the narrower rear.

    Next to try, is an Ardent Race on the back.[/QUOTE]


    Have you tried the Ardent Race (front) and Ikon 2.35 rear combo? I was thinking of running this same combo on my XC rig with DT Swiss 1501 XR spline wheels (24mm external width). I have a new Hans Dampf that I was going to run with an Ikon rear, but I think it sounds like the Ardent Race would be a good alternative, still providing good traction up front but being lighter than the Hans Dampf.

  73. #273
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    4,595
    Quote Originally Posted by MHCBH View Post
    Have you tried the Ardent Race (front) and Ikon 2.35 rear combo? I was thinking of running this same combo on my XC rig with DT Swiss 1501 XR spline wheels (24mm external width). I have a new Hans Dampf that I was going to run with an Ikon rear, but I think it sounds like the Ardent Race would be a good alternative, still providing good traction up front but being lighter than the Hans Dampf.
    IMO Ardent Race up front with Ikon 2.35 rear would be wonky. Ikon 2.35 side knobs are more substantial and it's a more voluminous tire.

  74. #274
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    2,451
    Ardent Race rear with Ardent 2.4" front might be a good combo for days when a full Ikon setup may not be enough.

  75. #275
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    111
    Quote Originally Posted by Alias530 View Post
    IMO Ardent Race up front with Ikon 2.35 rear would be wonky. Ikon 2.35 side knobs are more substantial and it's a more voluminous tire.
    Just curious why you think the Ardent/Ikon combo would be wonky? Is is not good to combine two tires that are too different in compounds/tread pattern - such as also running the Hans Dampf/Ikon as well? When you say that the Ikon 2.35 is more voluminous with more substantial side knobs, do you think it would be better to just run Ikon front/rear - maybe in 2.35 front/2.2 rear?

  76. #276
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 8iking VIIking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,252
    Quote Originally Posted by MHCBH View Post
    Just curious why you think the Ardent/Ikon combo would be wonky? Is is not good to combine two tires that are too different in compounds/tread pattern - such as also running the Hans Dampf/Ikon as well? When you say that the Ikon 2.35 is more voluminous with more substantial side knobs, do you think it would be better to just run Ikon front/rear - maybe in 2.35 front/2.2 rear?
    Typically you would want the tire with more traction/volume in the front if you are running 2 different tires

    And yes, ikon 2.35 front/2.2 rear is a great combo. I've been running them for quite a while now and really like them. I know I'm not the only one

  77. #277
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    4,595
    Quote Originally Posted by MHCBH View Post
    Just curious why you think the Ardent/Ikon combo would be wonky? Is is not good to combine two tires that are too different in compounds/tread pattern - such as also running the Hans Dampf/Ikon as well? When you say that the Ikon 2.35 is more voluminous with more substantial side knobs, do you think it would be better to just run Ikon front/rear - maybe in 2.35 front/2.2 rear?
    You want your grippier/bigger tire up front.

    MTB seems like the only wheeled sport where the smaller tire goes where power is delivered.

  78. #278
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    146
    Just ordered a 29 2.35 exo, tr to go on my 120mm full sus bike. Hoping it's the perfect tire for the Midwest here. I need a little less than the mkii, NN, and ardent class, but every time I try something less it lacks too much on the more technical single track that I enjoy. Hoping this will be the best of both worlds or am I asking too much?

  79. #279
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    164
    Quote Originally Posted by lawnboi View Post
    Just ordered a 29 2.35 exo, tr to go on my 120mm full sus bike. Hoping it's the perfect tire for the Midwest here. I need a little less than the mkii, NN, and ardent class, but every time I try something less it lacks too much on the more technical single track that I enjoy. Hoping this will be the best of both worlds or am I asking too much?
    I've posted earlier in this thread, but I have been running the 2.35 Ikon front and rear on my Niner RIP 9 RDO all spring and have been extremely happy with them. At Mohican State Park (Mohican State Park MTB Trail Mountain Bike Trail, Loudonville village, OH - that's my Jet 9 on the picture...) the trail is a mix of smooth single track, but also a lot of rocky and rooty sections and I had no issues at all with traction. The only thing is doesn't have is mud. I'm planning to leave the 2.35 Ikons on this bike even when I head to Colorado to ride some of the single track around Vail and Aspen in July. I will bring some other tires along but based on what I saw out there last summer, I suspect the Ikon's will be perfect.

    I'm going to run a different combo on my Jet 9 RDO this weekend. I'm going to run the smaller Ikon 2.2 on the rear and an Ardent Race on the front.

  80. #280
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,613
    Quote Originally Posted by lawnboi View Post
    Just ordered a 29 2.35 exo, tr to go on my 120mm full sus bike. Hoping it's the perfect tire for the Midwest here. I need a little less than the mkii, NN, and ardent class, but every time I try something less it lacks too much on the more technical single track that I enjoy. Hoping this will be the best of both worlds or am I asking too much?
    You should be good with the Ikon 2.35. Where in the Midwest? It's a great front tire.

  81. #281
    Perpetual n00b
    Reputation: dgw2jr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,762
    Quote Originally Posted by lawnboi View Post
    Just ordered a 29 2.35 exo, tr to go on my 120mm full sus bike. Hoping it's the perfect tire for the Midwest here. I need a little less than the mkii, NN, and ardent class, but every time I try something less it lacks too much on the more technical single track that I enjoy. Hoping this will be the best of both worlds or am I asking too much?
    I run the Ikon 2.35 front and Ikon 2.2 rear. In Utah. I think you'll be ok.
    The leg bone's connected to the Cash Bone!

  82. #282
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    146
    Quote Originally Posted by BruceBrown View Post
    You should be good with the Ikon 2.35. Where in the Midwest? It's a great front tire.
    Wi, central and northern ( 9mile, Levis and standing rocks are my regulars). We have some nice rocky and rooty trails, love techy trails, and I'm hoping the higher volume helps, so long as the side nobs hold in turns.

    Currently running a 2.4 mkii f, 2.2mkii r, and I'm very happy with this combo and would definetly buy again for an all round combo.

  83. #283
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    111
    I apologize if this has been discussed elsewhere but would there be any issue running the 2.35 Ikon on the front with a rim with 20mm internal width (DT Swiss 1501 XR Spline)?

  84. #284
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    5,096
    Quote Originally Posted by lawnboi View Post
    Wi, central and northern ( 9mile, Levis and standing rocks are my regulars). We have some nice rocky and rooty trails, love techy trails, and I'm hoping the higher volume helps, so long as the side nobs hold in turns.
    I think a lot of it depends on your weight. I personally would never run an Ikon as a front tire, but I am 230lbs. When I need to change direction quickly, I need to depend on a knobby front tire. But if you are a lighter rider, I could see getting away with a less aggressive tire.

    I have ridden Levis and 9mile, but never standing rocks. I run a Nobby Nick up front 2.35 and Racing Ralph rear 2.35. A lot of people in the area run Schwalbe tires, but the wear rate sucks!!

  85. #285
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    146
    Quote Originally Posted by jonshonda View Post
    I think a lot of it depends on your weight. I personally would never run an Ikon as a front tire, but I am 230lbs. When I need to change direction quickly, I need to depend on a knobby front tire. But if you are a lighter rider, I could see getting away with a less aggressive tire.

    I have ridden Levis and 9mile, but never standing rocks. I run a Nobby Nick up front 2.35 and Racing Ralph rear 2.35. A lot of people in the area run Schwalbe tires, but the wear rate sucks!!
    I only run 160 with gear, but I tend to like to ride pretty aggressively, after having the ikon in my hands I think I could maybe run it as a front, but I'm not going too until I see what it does on the back. I'm surprised at the stiffness of the 2.35 side knobs.

    So for now the mkii will stay up front. Iv considered schwalbe, and I'm not overly rough on tires at my size, but the 80+ dollar price tag for them steered me away, atleast for now. I think, at least on this bike, a nn, ardent or mkii will stay up front.

    And when I go out west, to places like Utah, I put on an even more aggressive tires

  86. #286
    Perpetual n00b
    Reputation: dgw2jr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,762
    Quote Originally Posted by lawnboi View Post
    And when I go out west, to places like Utah, I put on an even more aggressive tires
    Well then you're just wasting money and good rubber! Save the big knobbies for the places with real dirt that the knobs can actually get a bite into. With all the rock, sand, and gravel we have here in Utah a high volume low knob tire is the way to go.

    In the Midwest I ran Fast Traks. Tight, twisty, hardpacked trails in the Midwest never gave much opportunity to wash out the front.

    The only time I was glad to have some big knobby tires was in Oregon. Mostly because it rained the whole time.
    The leg bone's connected to the Cash Bone!

  87. #287
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    4,595
    Quote Originally Posted by dgw2jr View Post
    Well then you're just wasting money and good rubber! Save the big knobbies for the places with real dirt that the knobs can actually get a bite into. With all the rock, sand, and gravel we have here in Utah a high volume low knob tire is the way to go.

    In the Midwest I ran Fast Traks. Tight, twisty, hardpacked trails in the Midwest never gave much opportunity to wash out the front.

    The only time I was glad to have some big knobby tires was in Oregon. Mostly because it rained the whole time.
    I ride a Minion DHF up front year round and it gets to pretty much concrete hard hardpack in the dead of summer. Still seems to bite better than lighter duty tires I've ridden.

  88. #288
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    146
    Quote Originally Posted by jonshonda View Post
    I think a lot of it depends on your weight. I personally would never run an Ikon as a front tire, but I am 230lbs. When I need to change direction quickly, I need to depend on a knobby front tire. But if you are a lighter rider, I could see getting away with a less aggressive tire.

    I have ridden Levis and 9mile, but never standing rocks. I run a Nobby Nick up front 2.35 and Racing Ralph rear 2.35. A lot of people in the area run Schwalbe tires, but the wear rate sucks!!
    Quote Originally Posted by dgw2jr View Post
    Well then you're just wasting money and good rubber! Save the big knobbies for the places with real dirt that the knobs can actually get a bite into. With all the rock, sand, and gravel we have here in Utah a high volume low knob tire is the way to go.

    In the Midwest I ran Fast Traks. Tight, twisty, hardpacked trails in the Midwest never gave much opportunity to wash out the front.

    The only time I was glad to have some big knobby tires was in Oregon. Mostly because it rained the whole time.
    I guess I should have specified, I prefer beefier tires in moab. Though I'd the 2.35 ikon will probably stay in the rear

  89. #289
    mtbr member
    Reputation: johnD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    780
    I might have missed it but , any idea what a ikon 2.35 would be on the flow ex 25.5mm id ? Trying to determine if they will clear the chainstays , thanks in advanced.

  90. #290
    Perpetual n00b
    Reputation: dgw2jr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,762
    Quote Originally Posted by johnD View Post
    I might have missed it but , any idea what a ikon 2.35 would be on the flow ex 25.5mm id ? Trying to determine if they will clear the chainstays , thanks in advanced.
    Just measured my Ikon 2.35 EXO TLR at 60mm on a WTB Frequency i25.
    The leg bone's connected to the Cash Bone!

  91. #291
    Perpetual n00b
    Reputation: dgw2jr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,762
    Quote Originally Posted by lawnboi View Post
    I guess I should have specified, I prefer beefier tires in moab. Though I'd the 2.35 ikon will probably stay in the rear
    I'm including Moab when I said Utah. All that slickrock just sands big knobs down to nubs.

    The leg bone's connected to the Cash Bone!

  92. #292
    mtbr member
    Reputation: johnD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    780
    Quote Originally Posted by dgw2jr View Post
    Just measured my Ikon 2.35 EXO TLR at 60mm on a WTB Frequency i25.
    Thanks for getting the measurement ! They should clear with plenty of room.

  93. #293
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    146
    You guys convinced me, ordered another for the front.

    Now if only these dang mkii's would die.

    The rear is going on 1000 miles and it just won't die.

  94. #294
    Perpetual n00b
    Reputation: dgw2jr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,762
    Quote Originally Posted by lawnboi View Post
    You guys convinced me, ordered another for the front.

    Now if only these dang mkii's would die.

    The rear is going on 1000 miles and it just won't die.
    Set aside the mkii for winter!
    The leg bone's connected to the Cash Bone!

  95. #295
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,613
    Quote Originally Posted by MHCBH View Post
    I apologize if this has been discussed elsewhere but would there be any issue running the 2.35 Ikon on the front with a rim with 20mm internal width (DT Swiss 1501 XR Spline)?
    Should be fine. I've got one on a Crest (21mm inner width) and it is fine.

  96. #296
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    2,451
    Quote Originally Posted by MHCBH View Post
    I apologize if this has been discussed elsewhere but would there be any issue running the 2.35 Ikon on the front with a rim with 20mm internal width (DT Swiss 1501 XR Spline)?
    I'm running X-king 2.4's on 19 mm rims and just have to keep the pressure above 20 psi to stop them rolling.
    But then again, i'm not fast or aggressive in my riding style.

  97. #297
    mtbr member
    Reputation: KevinGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,829
    Just had my first ride on a Maxxis Ikon 2.35 front wheel. VERY nice tire. Excellent grip on loose-on-hardpack. I was previously running a 2.35 Geax Sturdy which had a very square profile and aggressive side knobs. I think the rounded profile works far better and the 2.35 gives a nice contact patch. Maybe the square profile is better on loamy, or wet dirt where it can dig in but the Ikon 2.35 was noticeably better on the very first turn on loose and hardpack.

  98. #298
    mtbr member
    Reputation: andyfloyd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    486
    Quote Originally Posted by BruceBrown View Post
    Should be fine. I've got one on a Crest (21mm inner width) and it is fine.
    I run a 2.35 on the front and 2.2 on the rear of my Blur TR. Its 27.5" its not 29" but the same applies here. The Ikon grips way better than you think its going to. I have tried to break the front loose leaning it into flat corners with a little loose over and it sticks really great. Best tires I have used for trails here in the east. Doesnt like a ton of mud, but hangs in there.

    My rims are 21.5 internal and I weigh 150 and I run around 22psi with no issues.
    2014 27.5" SC Blur TRa - 2014 IP-106 Chiner 29er - 2005 Fuji Team SL 16.2lbs -

  99. #299
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    146
    Got a few rides on the 2.35 ikons now. Running them on 22.5mm internal bontrager rims with their tlr rim strip and sealant. Seated with a floor pump. Nice plump tire, a hair bigger than the 2.4 continentals I was using. Definitely a big volume tire and I suspect like the conti tires I'll need to run a little extra pressure with the skinnier rims to keep them from squirming (wish I could spring for some 27-30mm rims). Currently running 24psi(on my floor pump), might try a few psi less in the coming days.

    The only huge difference I noticed so far, coming from the 2.4 mkii f, 2.2 mkii r, is the rolling resistance. These tires roll great.
    Next I noticed the difference in the casing, seems like maxxis exo is a bit more forgiving than the conti protection casing, and lastly a little weight difference was there, both mine ran in at ~730 grams.

    As a rear tire it is nice, I didn't see it giving up much to the mkii I had back there besides the braking. It will definetly be staying there for a while. So far it's my favorite rear, grips well enough and with that big contact patch it grips roots and rocks well. Just need to be careful on the loose corners as the side nobs don't bite much.

    As a front I don't like it as much. I just can't push it where ever I want like I could the mkii, but that's to be expected. Takes a lot more attention, and the few time where I got tired and stopped, the ikon was sure to put me on the ground. It just doesn't corner as well, though it's an xc tire so I get it. Nothing magic though, I honestly don't think I'll be putting another ikon on the front of my do all trail bike again. Though I'm going to keep running it in the front for a while yet, maybe I'll change my mind. They do climb and roll very very well.

    The only thing I didn't like about them is the braking, I can't come flying into a tight, loose corner anymore at full speed without losing control.

    So to close, as an aggressive xc tire I think they are perfect, they demand a little more attention in the front though.

  100. #300
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    2,451
    Quote Originally Posted by lawnboi View Post
    As a front I don't like it as much. I just can't push it where ever I want like I could the mkii, but that's to be expected..
    Tried an Ardent 2.4 on the front?
    They still roll very nicely.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Maxxis iKon
    By georgelza in forum 27.5
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 10-06-2013, 02:09 PM
  2. Maxxis Ikon
    By tigerwah in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 66
    Last Post: 10-21-2011, 03:09 PM
  3. Maxxis Ikon (without EXO)?
    By phlegm in forum Weight Weenies
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-16-2011, 07:58 PM
  4. maxxis crossmark and maxxis ikon
    By neeeko in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-04-2011, 07:04 AM
  5. Maxxis Ikon
    By rufus in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-23-2011, 02:22 PM

Members who have read this thread: 186

Posting Permissions

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